On Tuesday 20 and Wednesday 21 February 2024, the High Court heard an appeal against the 2023 decision to deny Julian Assange permission to appeal his extradition order. The hearing was Assange’s final bid in the UK courts to prevent extradition.

The WikiLeaks founder is wanted by the US authorities to be tried for hacking and espionage after he published thousands of leaked documents about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.  His lawyers argued that the charges are politically motivated and that he would face up to 175 years in prison if extradited.  Whistleblower, Edward Snowden tweeted that the case is “the most important press freedom case in the world.” Human rights organisations and press freedom groups, including Article 19, Reporters Without Borders and PEN International, have called for Assange’s immediate release from prison. Lawyers for the US refuted that the charges are politically motivated, argued that Assange had not acted in a journalistic capacity and emphasised assurances about how he would be treated if extradited.

If Assange loses the appeal, his only remaining route will be to apply to the European Court of Human Rights for a stay, however these are only granted in exceptional circumstances. More information is available from the BBC, Guardian, Telegraph, FT, The Independent, New York Times, CBS News, AP News, Press Gazette, Sky News, Al Jazeera and Reuters. The LSE Media Blog has published an article on the importance of whistleblowers to democracy.

GB News Presenter Dan Wootton has sought an apology, retraction and damages from Byline Times for reporting that he was under police investigation last October. The letter before action is reported to cite the precedent set in the 2022 Supreme Court judgement, Bloomberg v ZXC. Wootton’s legal team is also said to have written to Carol Vorderman and Emily Maitlis over similar statements they made on Twitter. Several other newspapers reported on his investigation at the time, however removed the coverage when threatened with legal action. On Wednesday 21 February, Wootton released a statement confirming that the police would be taking no further action against him. The Press Gazette and Daily Express covered the story.

On Friday 23 February 2024, the government announced that it would support a private member’s bill which is aimed at reducing the use of SLAPPs in the courts. The bill would introduce a measure to allow judges to dismiss a spurious case at the earliest stage and introduce a costs protection scheme for defendants. The Law Society recommended that the bill should include an objective test for defining a SLAPP and that what is defined to be ‘in the public interest’ should be significantly redrafted. The Vice-Chair of the Society of Media Lawyers, Iain Wilson criticised the bill as being “plainly incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights and risks handing more power to the unregulated press.” Read the Government’s press release here. The Guardian, Press Gazette and City A.M. reported on the development.

Internet and Social Media

On 19 February 2024, the European Commission opened formal proceedings to determine whether the video sharing platform, TikTok has breached the Digital Services Act in relation to the protection of minors, advertising transparency, data access for researchers and the risk management of addictive design and harmful content. This formalisation follows a preliminary investigation by the Commission. Read the Commission’s press release here.

Data privacy and data protection

The ICO has issued an enforcement notices to Serco Leisure and community leisure trust to stop using facial recognition technology to monitor the attendance of their workers and destroy all biometric data. Following an investigation, the regulator found that the company and trusts had been unlawfully processing the biometric data of over 2,000 employees at 38 facilities. Workers were not offered an alternative and Serco was unable to show that the technology was necessary or proportionate. The ICO also published new guidance for all organisations considering using people’s biometric data.

The Open Rights Group have published a report which reveals that the data of individuals referred to the counter-terrorism Prevent programme is widely shared – with airports, ports and immigration services – and retained for years, even when a case does not meet the threshold for further investigation. The report argues that it is difficult for those who have been referred to request disclosure and erasure of their data, since they often do not know that it has been processed by Prevent. Read the press release here. The full report is available here.

Surveillance

The Investigatory Powers (Amendment) Bill had its second reading in the House of Commons this week, after being introduced in the Lords last November. In response to a legal challenge by the human rights organisation, Liberty, the Government has committed to adding an amendment to the Investigatory Powers Act 2016, which would require an independent review before intelligence agencies can search journalistic communications in bulk, the Press Gazette reports. Privacy International argue that some of the other amends would weaken safeguards by allowing intelligence agencies to harvest millions of facial images and social media data and expands the range of politicians who can authorize the surveillance of parliamentarians.

Newspaper Journalism and regulation

Ofcom has opened an investigation into the GB News program, People’s Forum: The Prime Minister, after it received around 500 complaints. Rishi Sunak appeared on the show and responded to questions of studio audience members. The show’s presenter stated during the broadcast that the questions had not been seen in advance by the Prime Minister or by GB News. The investigation will concern the impartiality requirements for programs dealing with matters of major political controversy and major matters relating to current public policy. The BBC, Guardian, Telegraph, Sky News, The Independent and the FT reported on the investigation.

IPSO

Statements in open court and apologies

On 20 February 2024, there was a statement in open court in the case of Tayler v Harper Collins Publishers Limited QB-2022-000353.

New Issued cases

There were two defamation claims and one miscellaneous claim were issued in the Media and Communications List last week.

Last week in the courts

On 19 February 2024, there was an application for dismissal before Collins Rice J in the case of Courtney v Ronksley.

There was also a strike out application in the case of Vince v Associated Newspapers Limited.  The case concerns an article in the Daily Mail which Green energy industrialist Dale Vince contends suggested he was the subject of sex harassment allegations.  There was a report in the Press Gazette.

On the same day, Collins Rice J handed down judgment in the case of WFZ v BBC [2024] EWHC 343 (KB). Last June, the High Court granted anonymity to a high-profile celebrity, WFZ, who had been accused by multiple women of sexual misconduct and ruled that the BBC could not broadcast the allegations, as there was a “substantial risk” that it would impede any subsequent criminal proceedings. In those proceedings, the journalist working on the story had filed a witness statement concerning how they learned of the allegations from WFZ’s accusers. In the current proceedings, WFZ sought permission to use the witness statement in his representations to the police and CPS in relation to any decision to charge him due to, what his solicitors describe as, “significant discrepancies” between what the accusers told the police and what they told the journalist. Collins Rice J refused the application on the basis that the claimant’s application was premature. The court held that the proper time for WFZ to make representations based on the witness statement would be after the criminal procedure had taken place [58]. 5RB and Law 360 summarised the judgement. The Press Gazette covered the story.

On 20 February 2024 there was a case management conference before Fancourt J in the MTVIL litigation, Various Claimants v News Group.

On 22 February 2024,  Julian Knowles J handed down judgment in the case of YSL v Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust [2024] EWHC 391 (KB).  The claim privacy and data protection was dismissed.

On the same day Master Dagnall gave judgment in the case of Hawrami v Journalism Development Network [2024] EWHC 389 (KB).  An application by the claimant for summary judgment on the issue of qualified privilege was dismissed.

There was also an extension application by the Claimant and an application by the Defendant for strike out and/or summary judgment before HH Lewis in the case of Matthews v Wakefield Metropolitan District Council KB-2023-002991.

On 23 February 2024, there was an application for default judgment before Steyn J in Schofield v Politicalite Limited and another KB-2023-003104.

Media law in other jurisdictions

Australia

On 20 February 2024, the Federal Court of Australia handed down judgement in the case of Greiss v Seven Network (Operations) Limited (No 2) [2024] FCA 98. The case concerned an allegation that the applicant, Mina Greiss, stared down the complainant in a rape case as she left the courtroom following the conviction of rugby player, Jarryd Hayne. A journalist for Seven Network, Leonie Ryan, shared a photo of Greiss on Twitter, alleging that he spat at the woman and stared her down. Greiss sued for defamation in relation to Ryan’s tweet, in addition to a news article published on Seven’s website and Facebook page. The applicant was only able to show that the Facebook post was defamatory and was awarded $37,940 on the basis that he spat towards, not at, the complainant. The defendant succeeded in its defence of contextual truth for the tweet and article. The Guardian, The Sydney Morning Herald and News.com covered the story.

Canada

On 20 February 2024, judgement was handed down in the case of Hugh Murphy v Robert Andrew Rodgers, 2024 NBKB 030. The parties to the claim were both members of a Yacht Club and the plaintiff was serving as the director. The defendant forwarded an email to 11 other members of the club saying that he was not sure why the plaintiff would lie about a list of improvements that had been recommended by the general manager upon his resignation. The judge concluded that the words were not defamatory and, even if they were, the defence of fair comment would have succeeded. The court granted the defendant’s application for summary judgement.

On 22 February 2024, the Court of Appeal for Ontario handed down judgement in the case of Gill v Maciver, 2024 ONCA 126. The appellant had commenced defamation, conspiracy and negligence proceedings against 23 defendants in a claim which was dismissed as ‘limiting debate on matters of public interest’ under s137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act. The appellant appealed the dismissal against four of the defendants and sought leave to appeal the first instance cost order, which exceeded $1.1 million. The appeal court dismissed the appeal and refused leave to appeal the costs orders on the basis that the claim was intended to silence critics [62] and full indemnity costs were justified [67].

Malaysia

On 20 February, the Communications Minister, Fahmi Fadzil, launched a revised Code of Ethics for Journalists with the aim of updating it to reflect the changes of social media and combatting disinformation and defamation. However, the code has faced backlash from media organisations, journalists and press freedom groups, who argue that it extends government control over the media as its provisions, including those relating to the privacy and confidentiality of sources, are open to interpretation. The code also includes a provision which would allow the Information Department, Japen, to cancel or retract a journalist’s accreditation card, since it is the issuing body. International Federation of Journalists urged the government to allow an independent media with an industry-regulated code. The Strait Times, Malay Mail and The Star covered the development.

Switzerland

The NGO’s Public Eye and TRIAL International were acquitted of defamation and slander by the Regional Court of Bern-Mittelland after the Kolmar Group AG filed a complaint about a report that they published. The joint report covered investigations into Kolmar’s involvement in the gasoil trade between 2014 and 2015 in Libya during a civil war. The court held that the investigation was in the public interest and that the NGOs had fulfilled their journalistic obligations. Read the NGOs’s press release here. Amnesty International reported on the ruling.

Research and Resources

Next week in the courts

From Monday 26 to 28 February 2024, there will be a trial in the case of Parsons v Atkinson QB-2021-004305 before Farbey J in Manchester.

On Tuesday 27 February 2024, there will be a hearing in the case of Rodoy v Optical Express Limited and others KB-2023-002437. On the same day, there will be an injunction application in the case of DfE v Hercules KB-2024-000389.

On Thursday 29 February 2024, there will be a hearing in the case of Taylor v Pathe Productions Limited and others KB-2023-003648.

On Friday 1 February 2024, there will be a strike out application in the case of Bridgen MP v Hancock MP KB-2023-002309. On the same day, there will be a hearing in the case of Unity Plus Healthcare Limited v Peter Clay & Others KB-2023-000060.

Reserved judgements

Sinton v Maybourne Hotels Limited, heard 19 and 20 December 2023 (Chamberlain J)

Dyson v Channel 4, heard 15 December 2023 (HHJ Lewis)

Pacini v Dow Jones, heard 13 December 2023 (HHJ Parkes KC)

Amersi v BBC, heard 8 December 2023 (HHJ Lewis)

Wilson v Mendelsohn and others, heard 4 to 8 December 2023 (HHJ Parkes KC)

Mueen-Uddin v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 1 and 2 November 2023 (UK Supreme Court).

George v Cannell and another, heard 17-18 October 2023 (UK Supreme Court)

Harcombe v Associated Newspapers, heard 3 to 7 and 10 to 11 July 2023 (Nicklin J)

MBR Acres v FREE THE MBR BEAGLES, heard 24-28 April 2023, 2-5, 9, 11-12, 15, 17-18, 22-23 May 2023 (Nicklin J)

This Round Up was compiled by Jasleen Chaggar who is a litigation and media paralegal at Atkins Dellow