Well, at the time Trafi was trying to claim it wasn't true.
But the wider point is - imagine if every statement in parliament could be injuncted by a company like that, just because MP wasn't personally able to prove the allegation. It'd be horrible.
Yes, I can see that, of course. Parliament is sovereign, after all. :) I just meant that since it seems very unlikely now that there is much to the HSBC-IGPL story, in this case it misfired--but perhaps that's part of the point for allowing it, or I'm jumping the gun again.
Yes, but that story was true--I meant to refer to when it's used for something that isn't true.