"English libel defendants must prove that each statement is true" is one of those sentences that rock you for a moment and remind you that you really can't pretend that all Western Democracies are basically the same.
Can you expand on what that means?
In my understanding, courts don't presumptively "already know" anything at all, except law and precedent. The whole point of a suit is that two parties are contesting knowledge, interpretation, or law. Even if a court's judge(s) suppose(s) something to be true, isn't the whole point that the defendent claims it to be false and is therefore entitled to a hearing?
Not OP, but the way I understood it was that the court already holds hard evidence confirming the statements to be undoubtedly true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation_Act_2013
https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2012-13/defamation.html