Inforrm's Blog

The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog

Month: July 2010 (Page 3 of 5)

Matrix Media Law Update 15 July 2010

July 15, 2010 / / 0 Comments

This is a weekly Media Law Update prepared by the Legal Information Team at Matrix Chambers, which they have kindly agreed to make available to readers of Inforrm.

Latest Cases

Commission v Bavarian Lager Co Ltd & Ors (C-28/08) CJEU – 13 Jul 2010,  The Court annulled a judgment of the Court of First Instance (now the General Court) in so far as it had annulled the Commission’s decision refusing access to document on basis of the exception relating to protection of privacy and integrity of individual and the exception relating to protection of decision-making process. Continue reading

“Interim Injunctions and the overlap between privacy and libel”, Part 1: Godwin Busuttil and Patrick McCafferty

July 14, 2010 / / 2 Comments

In the recent case of Terry (previously ‘LNS’) v Persons Unknown ([2010] EWHC 119 (QB)) the court addressed the inter-relationship between two principles: the principle that the court may grant an interim injunction to restrain a threatened misuse of private information where the claimant can show that his claim is (at least) more likely than not to succeed, and the rule in Bonnard v Perryman ([1891] 2 Ch 269 (CA)) whereby the court almost invariably will not grant an interim injunction to restrain the threatened publication of a libel, that is to say, material which if published may harm the claimant’s reputation. The question arose because, although the claim was brought for misuse of private information and concerned information which ostensibly was private to the claimant, the court regarded the claim in substance as one brought to protect reputation. For this reason, the court applied the rule in Bonnard v Perryman and dismissed the application for an interim injunction. Continue reading

Case Law: Flood v Times Newspapers, Reynolds defence fails

July 13, 2010 / / 5 Comments

The Court of Appeal today allowed the cross-appeal of the claimant, Gary Flood, against a decision of Mr Justice Tugendhat ([2009] EWHC 2375 (QB)) who had ruled, on the hearing of a preliminary issue, that the Times was entitled to rely on the defence of Reynolds qualified privilege in relation to the printed publication of an article.  The Court held that the publication of the article was not covered by Reynolds privilege.   It also dismissed the Times’ appeal against the judge’s finding that the privilege had been lost in relation to continuing online publication.  The judgment is available at [2010] EWCA Civ 804. Continue reading

Supreme Court Fair Comment Case – Media Intervention

July 12, 2010 / / 2 Comments

The Supreme Court’s first libel case, Spiller v Joseph (Case Details here) will be heard on 26 and 27 July 2010.  As we have mentioned in previous posts, a number of media organisations applied for and were granted permission to intervene to assist the court in clarifying the defence of “fair comment”.   Permission was granted on 29 June 2010 for the media to intervene by way of written and oral submissions limited to one hour.  The written Case for the Interveners has now been served.   This is a 37 page document with a six page Appendix setting out a “historical perspective”. Continue reading

Law and Media Round Up 11 July 2010 [updated]

July 11, 2010 / / 0 Comments

In this regular feature we draw attention to the last week’s law and media news and next week’s upcoming events. If readers have any news or events which they would like to draw attention to please add them by way of comments on this post. We are particularly interested in forthcoming events.

News

The House of Lords debate on the Second Reading of Lord Lester’s Defamation Bill on 9 July 2010 received wide coverage.  We had a post on it with the full transcript and the debate from BBC Parliament TV.   The media were, unsurpisingly, positive about the Government’s reaction.  According to the Daily Mail there are to be “New Laws to Protect Freedom of the Press”.  The Telegraph tells us that Britain’s ‘draconian libel laws’ are to be reformed. Continue reading

Lord Lester’s Bill, Second Reading Debate

July 9, 2010 / / 1 Comment

The House of Lords today debated Lord Lester’s Defamation Bill.  The debate was opened by Lord Lester, moving his bill . He expressed gratitude to the Minister for having met with him and his team.   He accepted that there should be a Select Committee or a draft Government Bill based on his version.  He expressed a preference for “a draft Government Bill subject to pre legislative scrutiny by a committee of both Houses“. Continue reading

Case Law: AP (No.2) – Supreme Court on Anonymity

July 9, 2010 / / 2 Comments

The Supreme Court has, for the second time this year, considered the circumstances in which it is appropriate to make an anonymity order in court proceedings.  In Re Guardian News & Media ([2010] UKSC 1) the Court overturned anonymity orders in respect of a number of individuals who had been subject to freezing orders.  However, in the recent case of Secretary of State for the Home Department v AP (No.2) ([2010] UKSC 26) the Court reached the opposite conclusion, upholding an order which had been made at the outset of the hearing. Continue reading

Lord Lester’s Defamation Bill – some criticisms and a proposal

July 8, 2010 / / 1 Comment

Lord Lester’s Defamation Bill is due for its Second Reading on 9 July 2010.   The Bill sets out to provide a partial codification of the defences to libel actions.  Some solid work has gone into the drafting of the bill but it is not comprehensive and proceeds on the (unstated) assumption that all the traditional elements of the tort of libel remain in place.  The aim of this post is not to provide a detailed examination of the Bill.  Professor Mullis and Dr Scott have considered it in some detail in their post and even more comprehensively in their draft paper.  Our purpose is more limited: we will mention two general criticisms and make a proposal as to the way forward.   Continue reading

Matrix Media Law Update, 8 July 2010

July 8, 2010 / / 0 Comments

This is a weekly Media Law Update prepared by the Legal Information Team at Matrix Chambers, which they have kindly agreed to make available to readers of Inforrm.

Latest Cases

Gözel & Özer v. Turkey  (App Nos. 43453/04 & 31098/05), ECtHR – 6 Jul 2010,  Virtually automatic convictions of the media for publication of texts by banned organisations breached ECHR, arts 6, 10.  For ECtHR press release, click here. (judgment available in French only) Continue reading

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2026 Inforrm's Blog

Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑