Anonymity in CJEU cases: privacy at the expense of transparency? – Peter Oliver

31 12 2018

Juliet famously asked: “Romeo, Romeo wherefore art thou Romeo?”  And then adds: “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other word would smell as sweet.”  Having an unfortunate name (like Montague, if you have the misfortune to fall in love with a Capulet) can be challenging.  But what about having no name?   Read the rest of this entry »





Australia: A brief history of recent court suppression orders – Richard Ackland

30 12 2018

“Suppression” is the Australian media-law word for 2018 … Everyone wants to know more about what has been suppressed by the courts … Invariably the cat gets out of the bag … Latest suppression statistics Australia-wide … Are suppression orders sensible in the age of the internet?  Read the rest of this entry »





Internet legal developments to look out for in 2019 – Graham Smith

29 12 2018

A bumper crop of pending litigation and legislative initiatives for the coming year (without even thinking about Brexit). Read the rest of this entry »





A brief introduction to the concept of privacy under English law, Part III – Suneet Sharma

28 12 2018

From the landmark case of Campbell and the development of breach of privacy as an action, it is clear that the integration of privacy as a concept in English law is still in its formative years. In Part III we consider some of the significant cases post-Campbell to date, bringing into relief key issues and developments in privacy law, many of which are ongoing or merit further consideration by the courts. Read the rest of this entry »





Drone hysteria and the serial privacy invaders of the British Press – Hugh Tomlinson QC

24 12 2018

The news last week was dominated by the “Gatwick drones” with the country’s second busiest airport being closed three times in three days and 140,000 passengers being stranded.  On Friday 21 December 2018 a local couple were arrestedfollowing a tip off“.  Read the rest of this entry »





Inforrm is taking a Winter Break

22 12 2018

Now that the legal term has ended, Inforrm is taking a winter break for a few weeks to allow the editorial team to relax. We will have a some occasional posts over the next fortnight but the full normal service will not be resumed until 14 January 2019. Read the rest of this entry »





Mirror Group Phone Hacking: IPSOmertà, Inaction and a Culture of Impunity – Julian Petley

21 12 2018

During the course of a three-week trial in March 2015, it was revealed how MGN papers, and especially the Sunday Mirror, had hacked the phones of eight well-known people, wreaking havoc in their personal lives by causing them to believe that stories about them appearing in the papers had been fed to them by their nearest and dearest. The victims included Shane Ritchie, Paul Gascoigne, Alan Yentob and Sadie Frost. Read the rest of this entry »





Family Courts Anonymisation Guidance: a curtain of secrecy? – FCReportingWatch

20 12 2018

The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew MacFarlane recently issued some guidance on the anonymisation of published judgments in family court cases. You can read that guidance here. Read the rest of this entry »





Deepfakes: all is not what it seems – Lorna Caddy

19 12 2018

This piece looks at machine learning methods being used to create a deepfake (a portmanteau of ‘deep learning’ and ‘fake’). While the advances in the technology are exciting news for the film industry, the potential for misuse is significant. Within a very short time frame, the technology allows a film to be created of an individual appearing to say and do things that she has not said and done. Read the rest of this entry »





Citizen journalists, standards of care, and the public interest defence in defamation – Jacob Rowbottom

18 12 2018

The public interest defence under section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 replaced the old defence of Reynolds privilege. A number of cases have since established that the old criteria for responsible journalism under Reynolds is still relevant when assessing the reasonable belief requirement of the new defence. Read the rest of this entry »