Media & Entertainment

MGN Ltd v United Kingdom - 39401/04 [2011] ECHR 66 18/01/2011

Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:05:35 GMT

Order to pay Naomi Campbell’s success fee was unjustified interference with Mirror’s Article 10 rights

Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2011] EWHC 159 (QB) 04/02/2011

Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:04:19 GMT

No ‘honest comment’ defence to malicious falsehood

JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd (Rev 1) [2011] EWCA Civ 42 31/01/2011

Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:00:09 GMT

An appeal was allowed, holding that, where a well-known sportsman had obtained an injunction restraining publication of a story, on the facts of the case, the public interest and the interests of the claimant would be better served by an order granting anonymity but allowing the publication of limited details of the case, rather than an order permitting the identity of the claimant to be revealed but with little other information.

JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2010] EWHC 2818 (QB) 05/11/2010

Fri, 26 Nov 2010 01:45:43 GMT

Open justice justified naming of privacy claimant

JXF v York Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2010] EWHC 2800 (QB) 04/11/2010

Fri, 26 Nov 2010 01:44:57 GMT

Child receiving substantial damages granted anonymity to protect him from fortune hunters and thieves

Gray v UVW [2010] EWHC 2367 (QB) 21/10/2010

Fri, 26 Nov 2010 01:43:39 GMT

Anonymity of privacy claimants a matter for the court, not the parties

Saaristo v Finland, European Court of Human Rights, Application no. 184/06 ([2010] ECHR 1497)

Fri, 26 Nov 2010 01:42:44 GMT

Fine and award of damages and costs for invasion of privacy of presidential candidate’s communications officer held to be violation of Article 10 right to freedom of expression

Watkins v Woolas [2010] EWHC 2702 (QB) 05/11/2010

Fri, 26 Nov 2010 01:41:30 GMT

MP convicted of illegal practice for publishing statements which he had no reasonable belief to be true

Sanoma Uitgevers BV v Netherlands, European Court of Human Rights, Application no. 38224/03

Thu, 21 Oct 2010 23:48:01 GMT

Requiring the disclosure of journalistic source material without independent review was in breach of Article 10

AMM v HXW [2010] EWHC 2457 (QB) 07/10/2010

Thu, 21 Oct 2010 23:44:23 GMT

Anonymous privacy injunction granted where no public interest and details of nature of information already public knowledge

Tchenguiz & Ors v Imerman [2010] EWCA Civ 908 29/07/10

Thu, 21 Oct 2010 19:33:18 GMT

The obtaining of a spouses’ financial information from a computer without knowledge or consent amounted to a breach of confidence and Hildebrand v Hildebrand did not provide any basis for such conduct being lawful. An appropriate test to determine whether such material was confidential was whether the spouse had a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of the information (as in Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers [2004] UKHL 22).

Secretary of State for the Home Department v AP (No. 2) [2010] UKSC 26

Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:59:25 GMT

Anonymity order continued where naming appellant would create risk of violence and intrusion into private life

Gaunt v OFCOM (Liberty intervening) [2010] EWHC 1756 (QB)

Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:52:09 GMT

Finding that gratuitously offensive insults and abuse breached Broadcasting Code was not a disproportionate interference with speaker’s freedom of expression

R (on the application of Harper and Johncox) v Aldershot Magistrates Court & Ors, [2010] EWHC 1319, 08/06/10

Thu, 01 Jul 2010 18:24:29 GMT

Police officer defendants fail in attempt to restrain publication of their addresses

Al Rawi & Ors v Security Service & Ors [2010] EWCA Civ 482

Thu, 20 May 2010 20:54:38 GMT

‘Closed court procedure’ not available in ordinary civil proceedings

TUV v Persons Unknown [2010] EWHC 853 (QB)

Thu, 20 May 2010 20:54:06 GMT

Applicants for injunctions only required to serve media organisations who have shown an interest in publication

Independent News and Media Ltd & Ors v A [2010] EWCA Civ 343

Thu, 06 May 2010 19:05:22 GMT

Upholding Hedley J’s decision at first instance ([2009] EWHC 2858 (Fam)), Court of Protection proceedings relating to a well-known figure could be attended by a limited number of press representatives as, considering Articles 6, 8 and 10 of the European Convention, there was a “good reason”, as required by s.93 of the Court of Protection Rules 2007, to depart from the general rule that hearings are to be in private and the judge had not erred in principle or reached a conclusion that was plainly wrong.

R (on the application of Mohamed) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2) [2010] EWCA Civ 158

Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:10:13 GMT

Counsel for the Foreign Secretary had written to the Court of Appeal to ask for reconsideration of a paragraph in R (on the application of Mohamed) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2010] EWCA Civ 65, and as a result the Court had revised the paragraph. However, it became clear that lawyers for Mr Mohamed, the applicant for judicial review, may not have seen the letter and objected to the change to the judgment. Given the unusual public interest in the matter, the court deemed it appropriate to publish the original version of the paragraph.

Guardian News and Media Ltd & Ors in HM Treasury v Ahmed & Ors [2010] UKSC 1

Wed, 24 Feb 2010 23:47:19 GMT

Terror suspect anonymity orders lifted where public interest in identification

The five applicants were individuals subject to orders under terrorism legislation, with various freezing orders in place. All of the individuals had been granted anonymity, despite the identities of at least two being in the public domain. Balancing Articles 8 and 10 of the European Convention, which were both engaged, on the facts, the powerful public interest in identification outweighed the potential negative effects on the individual's private lives.

R (on the application of Mohamed) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2010] EWCA Civ 65

Wed, 24 Feb 2010 23:36:06 GMT

Redacted paragraphs in terror suspect judgment published

An appeal against the redaction of paragraphs in a judgment that contained a summary of reports relating to the treatment of a detained suspected terrorist made by the US government to the UK government succeeded as there was a clear public interest in publication of the paragraphs; they did not reveal information of interest to terrorists or otherwise contrary to national security; and the information they contained was essentially already in the public domain.

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council v BBC [2010] EWHC 53 (QB)

Wed, 24 Feb 2010 23:35:01 GMT

Injunction restraining publication not continued where no threat to publish and failure to follow correct procedures in application

An injunction prohibiting publication of information relating to a Serious Case Review of very violent offences committed by two eleven year old boys was not continued as the applicant had failed to properly identify the specific private and/or confidential information or show that there was any threat to publish that information. Further there had been “lamentable omissions” in procedure, in that no notice had been given prior to the application (without explanation), CPR PD 25 had not been followed, s.12 of the Human Rights Act 1998 had not been drawn to the Judge's attention and the applicant had refused to provide the BBC with a copy of the draft order given to the Judge.

John Terry (previously 'LNS') v Persons Unknown [2010] EWHC 119 (QB)

Wed, 24 Feb 2010 23:33:57 GMT

Injunction restraining publication not continued where only limited threat to publish and claim unlikely to succeed

An injunction was not continued where there was a threat to publish only one of four categories of information the publication of which was sought to be restrained (the fact of a relationship). In relation to that category of information, there was no evidence of a breach of confidence; the applicant had spoken to the press on the subject; there might be a defence of publication being reasonably believed to be in the public interest (which the court could not assess, as the applicant had issued the application against 'persons unknown' rather than the media groups he intended to serve any order upon); and the applicant's true complaint appeared to be of reputational damage, such that the rule against prior restraint in defamation claims should be applied.

Financial Times & Others v UK, ECHR, Application no. 821/03 (15 December 2009)

Tue, 29 Dec 2009 23:30:01 GMT

UK breached Article 10 by ordering disclosure of document which would reveal journalistic source

BKM Ltd v British Broadcasting Corporation [2009] EWHC 3151 (Ch) (02 December 2009)

Tue, 29 Dec 2009 23:28:55 GMT

Injunction restraining television programme refused where public interest outweighed privacy interests

G & G v Wikimedia Foundation Inc [2009] EWHC 3148 (QB) (02 December 2009)

Tue, 29 Dec 2009 23:27:30 GMT

Norwich Pharmacal order granted against Wikipedia to identify user publishing private information on online encylopaedia; claimants anonymised,

Independent News and Media Ltd & Ors v A [2009] EWHC 2858 (Fam) (12 November 2009)

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 17:39:48 GMT

Media allowed to report Court of Protection proceedings concerning well-known figure

RST v UVW [2009] EWHC 2448 (QB) (11 September 2009)

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 17:38:21 GMT

Interim injunction granted to prevent publication of sexual encounters where written non-disclosure agreement entered into

Re Child X (Residence and Contact – Rights of media attendance – FPR Rule 10.28(4)) [2009] EWHC 1728 (Fam)

Thu, 08 Oct 2009 19:22:17 GMT

Media excluded from celebrity family proceedings

Marathon Mutual Ltd & Anor v Waters & Anor [2009] EWHC 1931 (QB)

Thu, 08 Oct 2009 19:20:18 GMT

Words complained of must refer, directly or indirectly, to the Claimant

Metropolitan International Schools Ltd. (t/a Skillstrain and/or Train2game) v Designtechnica Corp (t/a Digital Trends) & Ors [2009] EWHC 1765 (QB) (16 July 2009)

Thu, 08 Oct 2009 19:16:57 GMT

Search engine not a publisher of defamatory words in search results

Clift v Slough Borough Council & Anor [2009] EWHC 1550 (QB) (06 July 2009)

Thu, 08 Oct 2009 19:14:11 GMT

Publication by a council employee to members of other local authority departments and organisations of the placing of the Claimant on a ‘Violent Persons Register’ was only protected by qualified privilege to the extent that such publication was necessary and proportionate. As such, publication to individuals other than ‘customer facing staff’ was not so protected.

The Author of A Blog v Times Newspapers Ltd [2009] EWHC 1358 (QB) (16 June 2009)

Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:19:23 GMT

Bloggers not entitled to anonymity: The claimant was a police detective who had written anonymously about his experiences on the award-winning ‘Night Jack’ blog. A journalist working for the defendant newspaper had established his identity and the defendant wished to identify him in print. He sought an injunction to restrain them from doing so. The court refused, holding that his identity was not information which had the necessary quality of confidence nor was it something in respect of which he had a reasonable expectation of privacy. Further, any right to privacy was outweighed in this case by the public interest in knowing the identity of the particular police officer who had published the blog.

Sanoma Uitgevers BV v Netherlands, European Court of Human Rights, Application no. 38224/03

Thu, 04 Jun 2009 07:15:00 GMT

PROTECTION OF SOURCES: Journalists attended and photographed an illegal street race, having been invited on condition of maintaining participants’ anonymity. The police demanded the photographs and they handed them over after being threatened with arrest and after a judge indicated his view that they ought to do so.

The European Court of Human Rights held that their right to freedom of expression guaranteed under Article 10 of the Convention had not been violated as states could in certain circumstances properly require disclosure of the identities of sources for the purposes of investigating crime. Relevant considerations will include the nature and seriousness of the crimes in question, the precise nature and content of the information demanded, the existence of alternative possibilities to obtain the necessary information, and any restraints on the authorities' obtention and use of the materials concerned. Here the crimes were serious and the photos relevant and capable of identifying the perpetrators; no reasonable alternative source of this information was available; and the photos were used only in respect of investigating the robberies.

Quinton v Peirce & Anor [2009] EWHC 912 (QB) (30 April 2009)

Wed, 29 Apr 2009 23:00:00 GMT

Claims in election leaflet neither false nor malicious: A Conservative Party candidate’s claim for malicious falsehood against a Liberal Democrat rival failed as the words complained of, which formed part of an election leaflet, were not substantially inaccurate and the Liberal Democrat candidate had not been malicious. Further, although the words could be said to have been calculated to cause the Claimant financial loss, the Claimant had failed to establish that they had in fact caused such loss. A parallel claim under the Data Protection Act 1998 failed as the relevant processing and data was neither unfair nor inaccurate.

EGELAND AND HANSEID v. NORWAY - 34438/04 [2009] ECHR 622 (16 April 2009)

Thu, 16 Apr 2009 06:09:00 GMT

Conviction for photographing convicted murderer leaving court not a breach of right to freedom of expression: Journalists photographed one of the defendants in one of the highest profile murder trials in Norwegian history leaving court in a distraught state after she had been found guilty. She had posed for photos previously and images of her had been used in reporting of the trial, but the Norwegian courts held the photograph to be in breach of domestic law relating to court reporting and convicted and fined the journalists.

Considering primarily the privacy interests of the defendant and her emotional distress but also the desirability of safeguarding safe process and the margin of appreciation open to Member States, the European Court held that the photographers’ right to freedom of expression as guaranteed under Article 10 of the Convention had not been violated.

Ajinomoto Sweeteners Europe Sas v Asda Stores Ltd [2009] EWHC 781 (QB) (08 April 2009)

Tue, 07 Apr 2009 23:00:00 GMT

Trial of meaning as a preliminary issue ordered: The disputed meaning of the words complained of in a malicious falsehood claim brought by a manufacturer of artificial sweetener aspartame against the Asda supermarket chain was ordered to be tried as a preliminary issue as the potential costs savings were substantial.

Barclays Bank Plc v Guardian News Media Ltd [2009] EWHC 591 (QB) (19 March 2009)

Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:32:00 GMT

Injunction restraining publication of documents available on the internet continued where documents not easily available to general public

Bond v British Broadcasting Corporation [2009] EWHC 539 (QB) (19 March 2009)

Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:30:00 GMT

Words bore a meaning that there were strong grounds to suspect Claimant of previous wrongdoing as well as interest in receiving future improper payments

Noorani v Calver [2009] EWHC 561 (QB) (16 March 2009)

Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:01:00 GMT

A claim in slander over alleged oral publication of words suggesting that the Claimant was an “Islamic terrorist” to his wife and daughter were not mere vulgar abuse and were actionable per se, but their publication, even if proved, in context, and in light of a lack of any evidence of reputation damage from the alleged publishees, would not amount to a real and substantial tort and so was struck out as an abuse of process following the principles set down in Jameel v Dow Jones [2005] QB 946.

Prince Radu of Hohenzollern v Houston & Anor [2009] EWHC 398 (QB) (04 March 2009)

Wed, 04 Mar 2009 13:04:00 GMT

Substantial parts of defence of justification struck out

REKLOS AND DAVOURLIS v. GREECE - 1234/05 [2009] ECHR 200 (15 January 2009)

Thu, 15 Jan 2009 00:00:00 GMT

The taking and subsequent storage of a photograph of a newborn baby in hospital without the child’s parents’ consent was a violation of the child’s right to respect for his private and family life as guaranteed by Article 8 of the European Court of Human Rights.

Crossley & Anor v Newsquest (Midlands South) Ltd [2008] EWHC 3054 (QB) (11 December 2008)

Thu, 11 Dec 2008 00:00:00 GMT

No reasonable expectation of privacy for matters stated in open court.

An application to add a privacy claim to a libel claim in respect of a report of a hearing in open court (and related statements and comment) was struck out. If the claimants had wished to preserve the privacy and/or confidentiality of their financial arrangements they should have applied for the hearing to have been in private.

White v Withers LLP & Anor [2008] EWHC 2821 (QB) (19 November 2008)

Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Privacy: Solicitors’ possession of Hildebrand documents not a misuse of private information: The possession by solicitors of documents taken or intercepted by one spouse purely for use in matrimonial proceedings against the other did not amount to a misuse of private information, a breach of confidence or a wrongful interference with property.

H v Tomlinson [2008] EWCA Civ 1258 (13 November 2008)

Wed, 12 Nov 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Privacy and Article 8 reputation claim over arrest allegation rejected: A claim for misuse of private information and breach of the Claimant’s Article 8 right to reputation were rejected in respect of an allegation that he had been arrested at his father’s house for violent conduct and led away in handcuffs as he did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy and it was true that he was violent.

Hayter v Fahie CA 28/10/08

Tue, 28 Oct 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Malice not an issue for summary judgment : A summary judgment in favour of a Claimant was dismissed where the issue of the Defendant’s state of mind should not have been determined without a trial.

Club La Costa (UK) Plc v Gebhard & Anor [2008] EWHC 2552 (QB) (24 October 2008)

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Offer of amends must include acceptance that words refer to Claimant: An offer of amends was held ineffective where it was at least ambiguous as to whether the Defendants accepted that that the words complained of referred to the Claimant.

Times Newspapers Ltd & Ors v Soldier B & Ors [2008] EWCA Crim 2396 (24 October 2008)

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Reporting Restrictions: Anonymity granted where risk to life: Orders for the anonymity of five soldiers at a court martial were upheld where allowing them to be named in reports of proceedings would create a “real and immediate” risk to their lives.

Hussein v Farooq & Anor [2008] EWHC 2487 (QB) (22 October 2008)

Wed, 22 Oct 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Slander claim fails where words not shown to have been published: Eady J found for the Defendants in a slander claim where the Claimant had failed to show that the words complained of had been spoken.

Times Newspapers Ltd v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2008] EWHC 2455 (Admin)

Fri, 17 Oct 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Reporting Restrictions: Anonymity order upheld for subject of control order: In refusing an application to lift an anonymity order made in favour of the subject of the subject of a control order made under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005, the court had to consider not only the rights engaged under Articles 8 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, but also the effective operation of control orders and the reality of the likely effect of publicity on the subject.

Gentoo Group Ltd (Formerly Known As Sunderland Housing Company Ltd) & Anor v Hanratty [2008] EWHC 2328 (QB) (08 October 2008)

Wed, 08 Oct 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Trial by judge and jury not appropriate where prolonged examination of documents necessary: An application to vary the mode of a libel trial from judge and jury to judge alone was successful where the trial would require a prolonged examination of documents.

Applause Store Productions Ltd. & Anor v Raphael [2008] EWHC 1781 (QB) (24 July 2008)

Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Privacy: £17,000 damages award in Facebook libel and privacy claim: Claimants were awarded a total of £17,000 in libel and privacy damages for a false Facebook profile created by the Defendant.

Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd. [2008] EWHC 1777 (QB) (24 July 2008)

Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Privacy: No public interest in publishing details of ‘Nazi orgy’ without any Nazi elements: The Claimant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of sexual activities with a group of women which would be protected under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Defendant’s rights under Article 10 of the Convention were not sufficient to justify publishing details of such activities when the evidence did not support the Nazi connotations of the activities put forward by the Defendant as justifying the publication. The Claimant was awarded £60,000 damages.

HM Attorney General v ITV Central Ltd [2008] EWHC 1984 (Admin) (15 July 2008)

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Contempt of Court: A contemnor’s payment of third party costs is relevant to the assessment of the appropriate fine: A broadcaster responsible for publishing information which it was “blindingly obvious” was a contempt of court but which had sought to pay the ensuing third party costs would have this taken into account in assessing the appropriate amount that the broadcaster should be fined.

Wood v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2008] EWHC 1105 (Admin) (22 May 2008)

Thu, 22 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Privacy: Photographing of individual outside AGM for police purposes did not infringe right to privacy: The photographing of a an individual at a public company’s annual general meeting for police purposes, and the subsequent storing of that photograph by the police, did not infringe the individual’s right to privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and his claim for judicial review of the police officers and photographer’s actions was dismissed

P & Ors v Quigley [2008] EWHC 1051 (QB) (16 May 2008)

Fri, 16 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Privacy: Fictional sex story injuncted: A permanent injunction was granted to restrain the publication of a fictitious internet 'novella' featuring the Claimants, thinly disguised, partaking in unsavoury sexual conduct as there was no conceivable public interest nor any realistic prospect of any defence succeeding.

Murray v Big Pictures (UK) Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 446 (07 May 2008)

Wed, 07 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Privacy: Publication of photographs of infant in public place arguably infringed right to privacy: The taking and subsequent widespread publication of photographs of the infant claimant in a pushchair in a street arguably engaged his right to a private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and constituted a misuse of private information and a judge had been wrong to find otherwise.

Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2008] EWHC 687 (QB) (09 April 2008)

Wed, 09 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Privacy: Injunction not available where material widely available from other sources: Although material intended to be published by the Defendant was intrusive and demeaning and interfered with the Claimant’s Article 8 right to privacy, and there was no legitimate public interest in its publication, it had become so widely available on the internet that there was no point in restraining the Defendant by granting the injunction sought.

Animal Defenders International, R (On The Application of) v Secretary of State For Culture, Media and Sport [2008] UKHL 15 (12 March 2008)

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Broadcasting: Prohibition on political advertising did not breach Article 10: The prohibition on political advertising contained in s.321(2) of the Communications Act 2003 was not incompatible with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, being properly designed to protect against the potential mischief of biased political advertising.