Far-right activist Tommy Robinson was remanded in custody ahead of a large planned demonstration by his supporters in London. Kent Police confirmed his arrest following a High Court order over contempt of court allegations and a separate charge under the Terrorism Act for allegedly refusing to provide his phone’s PIN during a July border stop.

He faces a potential jail sentence for allegedly breaching a prior court injunction by spreading defamatory statements about a Syrian refugee. The BBC, The Independent, Sky News, iNews, The National, Byline Times and Manchester Evening News covered the development.

The Central Park Five, who were wrongfully convicted in 1989 of attacking a jogger and exonerated in 2002, have filed a defamation claim against Donald Trump, alleging that he made false statements about their case during a recent presidential debate. The Presidential nominee suggested that the men had confessed and pleaded guilty to the crime, despite the evidence that their confessions were coerced and the fact that DNA evidence and a confession by the true attacker had exonerated them. The claimants are seeking $75,000 for defamation, false light and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The BBC, CNBC, Forbes, ABC, CNN, Al Jazeera and Fox and reported on the lawsuit.

In a significant decision, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) extended whistleblower protections to charity trustees and clarified that workers are shielded from retaliation for whistleblowing before their employment begins. The case involved Dr. Nigel MacLennan, a psychologist and former President-Elect of the British Psychological Society, who alleged mistreatment by the charity after making protected disclosures. The Employment Tribunal dismissed his claims at first instance, however the EAT overturned this decision, finding that the tribunal had overly focused on Dr. MacLennan’s volunteer status without considering his free expression and non-discrimination rights under Article 10 and Article 14 of the ECHR. The case is now remitted for further proceedings with the whistleblowing charity, Protect and the Charity Commission having been given permission to intervene. Read Doughty Street’s press release here. More information is available from Third Sector and UK Fundraising.

On 23 October 2024, the Government introduced the Data (Use and Access) Bill (DUA Bill), which is largely viewed as a revival of the previous government’s Data Protection and Digital Information Bill which did not make it through the parliamentary wash-up. The bill includes amendments to the UK GDPR, such as a provision which would mean that data controllers no longer need to provide Privacy Notices to data subjects, where it would be “impossible” or “involve a disproportionate effort.” If passed, this would have the effect of greatly reducing the obligation on data controllers to notify data subjects about the information being processed about them. The DUA Bill also proposes to establish a framework for trusted digital verification services and reform the structure of the Information Commissioner’s Office. Mishcon de Reya and Taylor Wessing summarised the key provisions of the DUA Bill.

Internet and Social Media

Meta has announced plans to use facial recognition to tackle celebrity deep fakes that promote finance scams. The company already uses AI-driven ad review systems that identify fake endorsements, which it will now supplement by comparing the faces of those in ads to the social media profiles of celebrities. Any images which are identified by the software as a match will be automatically deleted. Celebrities who do not want their profiles used will have to opt-out of the scheme. Facebook’s previous experiments with facial recognition technology have led to lawsuits, including a Texan case, in which the company was accused of illegally collecting biometric data, and a discontinuation of the software due to privacy concerns. The BBC, The Guardian, Reuters, Washington Post, London Evening Standard and The Verge reported on the plans.

Data privacy and data protection

The ICO published a statement in response to the government’s plans to digitise the NHS. A spokesperson said regulator “support[s] the Government’s ambition to make the NHS fit for the future” and laid down their expectation that data protection should “be prioritized and built into all new initiatives from the start.”

DLA Piper’s Privacy Matters blog has summarised new guidance published by the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre on how organisations should communicate effectively in response to a cyber security incident.

Surveillance

The House of Commons Library published a briefing on Home CCTV systems and data protection law, which covers what rights constituents have in relation to their neighbours’ recording devices.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation have an article which explores the harms of street-level surveillance, including facial recognition, body-worn cameras, drones and real-time location tracking.

Newspaper Journalism and regulation

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has criticised UK counter-terror police after they raided the home of Associate Editor of The Electronic Intifada, Asa Winstanley, and reportedly seized journalistic material. The Metropolitan Police stated that the journalist’s home was searched as part of an investigation into suspected terrorism offences under sections 1 and 2 of the Terrorism Act. Winstanley was not arrested or charged, but had his electronic devices confiscated by the police. The IFJ stated that it has observed a trend of increasing use of “terrorism legislation by the British police,” which it describes as “harmful to journalists and media freedom.” The National, The Morning Star, Jewish News and The Middle East Eye covered the story.

News Corp has sued the AI-powered search engine, Perplexity for copyright and trademark infringement, seeking removal of their content from Perplexity’s index and substantial damages. The claim accuses Perplexity of profiting from News Corp’s content without permission or compensation, exploiting journalism by Dow Jones, who publish the Wall Street Journal, and NYP Holdings, who publish the New York Post. News Corp also claims Perplexity could potentially “hallucinate” false information, risking harm to its trademarks, and has requested a jury trial. The Press Gazette covered the development.

IPSO

There were no new IPSO rulings this week.

Statements in open court and apologies

We are not aware of any statements in open court or apologies last week.

New Issued cases

There were two defamation (libel and slander) claims filed on the media and communications list last week.

Last week in the courts

On Monday 21 October 2024, there was an application by the claimant in the case of Ibrahim v Kennedy KB-2023-002865.

On the same day, there was a pre-trial review in the case of RTM v Bonne Terre Limited & Hestview Limited KB-2023-000775.

On Tuesday 22 October 2024, the Court of Appeal (Sharp P, Nicola Davies and Dingemans LJJ) heard the appeal in the case of Prismall v Google UK Ltd.  Judgment was reserved.

On the same day there was a pre-trial review in the case of Smith v Surridge & others and Jackson v Surridge & others QB-2022-000858/QB-2022-000862.

On Wednesday 23 October 2024, Steyn J handed down judgement in the case of Hibbert v Hall [2024] EWHC 2677 (KB). The harassment and data protection claim was brought by two survivors of the 2017 Manchester Arena terrorist attacks, who suffered life-changing injuries as a result. The defendant, an independent journalist and broadcaster, alleged that the attack was an elaborate hoax orchestrated by the state with the victims, including the claimants, played by actors. The claimants argued that the publication of a book and multiple videos, which alleged that they were fabricating the event which caused their injuries, and visiting their homes amounted to harassment. The defendant denied the claims, arguing that his investigations were in the public interest. Steyn J ruled in favour of the claimants in relation to the harassment claim and found that the defendant’s defences of reasonable conduct and the detection of crime failed due to the falsity of his allegations. The court invited further submissions on the data protection claim and relief in the successful harassment claim. More information is available from Hudgell Solicitors. The BBC, Guardian, Sky News, Reuters, The New York Times, ITV News, LBC, The Times and Manchester Evening News covered the ruling.

On the same day, there was an appeal hearing before Linden J in the harassment case of Smith v Poulton & others KA-2024-000084.

On Thursday 24 October 2024, Steyn J set aside the interim injunction, which had been wrongly granted in the case of Ferreira-Malosso v Nowakowska [2024] EWHC 2696 (KB), after the court was misled about the test which applied. The injunction was sought in defamation proceedings, where the test which should be applied is the higher threshold set out in Bonnard v Perryman, rather than the American Cynamide principles. As per the rule in Bonnard v Perryman, the applicant must show that their claim is “bound to succeed,” however in the hearing before the interim application judge, the applicant only showed that he had a “good arguable case,” and the “balance of convenience” was in his favour. Steyn J found that, as the “nub of the claim is the protection of reputation,” the Bonnard v Perryman rule applies and, since the applicant could only show he has a “good arguable case,” dismissed the application for an injunction.

On the same day, there was a directions hearing before Richard Spearman KC in the defamation case of Kirkegaard v Smith QB-2018-000390 and an application for default judgment in the defamation case of BPP Holdings Limited and others v Blakey KB-2024-001080.

On Friday 25 October 2024, Aidan Eardley KC handed down judgement in the case of Bates v Rubython & Anor [2024] EWHC 2706 (KB). The libel claim was brought by retired businessman, Ken Bates, in relation to an article titled “The biggest Wrong-Un in Sport,” which was published in BusinessF1 Magazine and online. The article was held to bear the meaning that the Claimant amassed his wealth through dishonest business dealings, including evading paying UK taxes, having his rivals murdered and using libel proceedings to prevent the public reporting of his crimes. The claimant was not given an opportunity to respond to the allegations, which were described by the Judge as a “comprehensive character assassination,” in advance of publication. The defendant argued that the claimant had a pre-existing bad reputation, such that he was not caused reputational harm by the article, and that the claim should fail as it was based on inferential harm which did not discharge the burden of showing serious harm. The court rejected the defendant’s arguments, finding that the allegations caused serious harm due to their seriousness, repetition and the fact that readers of the article were likely to have known of the claimant. The claimant was awarded £150,000 in damages and an injunction to prevent further publication of the allegations. Carter-Ruck, Selborne Chambers and Law360 summarised the judgement and The London Evening Standard, The Independent and Rutland Times covered the ruling.

Media law in other jurisdictions

Australia

On 23 October 2024, the Supreme Court of Queensland handed down judgement in the libel case of Peros v Nationwide News Pty Ltd & Ors (No 3) [2024] QSC 192. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants had defamed him on the 13th episode of their podcast by imputing that he had murdered Shandee Blackburn, with whom he had shared a personal relationship. The plaintiff was charged with Blackburn’s murder but was later acquitted following a trial. An extended coronial hearing found that Blackburn died due to injuries sustained in a violent encounter with the plaintiff but did not make any findings that he was civilly liable or guilty of an offence. The defendants argued that the plaintiff had a poor reputation prior to the podcast, due to a widely reported coroner’s verdict, and that their statements did not therefore cause serious harm. The judge held that evidence of other publications that were harmful to the plaintiff’s reputation were admissible, since they were relevant to the issue of causation and therefore did not offend the principle in Dingle that a defendant cannot rely on other publications as proof of bad reputation in order to mitigate damages. The Supreme Court dismissed the proceedings, holding that the plaintiff had not proven the serious harm element of the cause of action.

On the same day, the Federal Court of Australia handed down judgement in relation to two applications in the case of Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Limited [2024] FCA 1226. In April 2024, former political Staffer, Bruce Lehrmann, lost his defamation claim against Network Ten and journalist, Lisa Wilkinson for their reporting of the rape allegations made against him by his former colleague in February 2021. Lehrmann (Appellant) now appeals the decision and seeks a stay of the costs order made by the judge at first instance, in which he was required to pay Network Ten $2 million. Network Ten and Wilkinson (Respondents) sought an order for the appellant to provide security for costs. The Federal Court dismissed the application for security, rejecting the Respondents’ arguments that there is no public interest in the appeal and emphasisng the seriousness of the claims against Lehrmann. The Court also found that the balance of convenience favoured granting the stay of the costs order until the appeal is determined, since the Appellant is impecunious and the Respondents would not be prejudiced by the stay.

Canada

On 21 October 2024, the Superior Court of Justice for Ontario dismissed the defendant’s motion for summary judgement in the case of Cook v. Corporation of the Township of Strong, 2024 ONSC 5842. The plaintiffs sued the defendant Township for defamation, malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office in relation to an ongoing dispute about the ownership of a lane which cut across the plaintiffs’ property. The court found that the plaintiffs had established a genuine issue in relation to each action [37] and that the issues are so intertwined that it would not be appropriate to grant partial summary judgement.

On 23 October 2024, the Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the appeal in the case of Miguna v. Sitel Operating Corporation, 2024 ONCA 779. The plaintiff claimed that the defendants, who operate a due diligence database, had defamed him and breached his privacy by designating him as a ‘politically exposed person’ due to his former role as an advisor to the President of Kenya. The Court agreed with the motion judge’s finding that the plaintiff’s claim was meritless and held that he failed to identify and specific legal or factual errors on appeal.

Guatemala

The Guatemalan journalist and founder of the newspaper elPeríodico, Jose Rubén Zamora has been released from house arrest after spending more than 800 days in custody. The court ruled that the time Zamora had spent in prison exceeded that permitted under the law and his release is required in line with his human rights. The journalist has been subjected to several spurious criminal charges, which UN independent experts expressed concern were “connected to his work as an investigative and anti-corruption journalist and that such tactics create a chilling effect.” Doughty Street’s press release is available here.

Ireland

Ireland’s Data Protection Commission (DPC) has reprimanded LinkedIn and issued the company with €310 million of administrative fines following an investigation into their used of personal data for behavioural analysis and targeting advertising. The DPC found that LinkedIn breached the principle of fairness under the GDPR and did not validly rely on consent, legitimate interests or contractual necessity as the legal basis of its processing. The Regulator found that consent was not freely or unambiguously given and the company’s legitimate interests were overridden by the fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subjects.

Malta

Kurt Buhagiar, a sheep farmer from Mosta, has filed a libel and defamation lawsuit against Nationalist MEP Peter Agius, claiming Agius falsely accused him of misusing €360,000 in EU agricultural funds for personal gain by building a villa instead of developing his farm. Buhagiar alleges that Agius’s statements, shared through social media, videos, and interviews during his election campaign, have severely harmed his reputation and business. The lawsuit follows an investigation by the European Anti-Fraud Office, which found no evidence of fraud or misuse of funds in Buhagiar’s projects. Despite these findings, Agius maintains his allegations, which have gained widespread public attention, in part due to concurrent charges of involuntary homicide against Buhagiar in relation to the collapse of a construction site. NewsBook reported the story.

Research and Resources

Next week in the courts

Between Monday 28 October and Wednesday 30 October 2024, there will be a 3-day trial in the case of Atole Timothy Enaholo v Claims Governance Totally PLC and another QB-2022-001025

On Monday 28 and Tuesday 29 October 2024, there will be a 2-day contempt application in the case of Hijazi v Yaxley-Lennon QB-2019-001740.

On Tuesday 29 October Richard Spearman KC will hand down judgment in the case of Joseph Pacini, Carsten Geyer -v- Dow Jones & Company Inc. KB-2023-001311 (heard 15 October 2024).

On Thursday 31 October, the court will hear applications in the case of Marinakis v Karipidis KB-2024-001325.

Reserved judgements

Smith v Poulton & others, heard 23 October 2024 (Linden J)

Prismall v Google UK Ltd, heard 22 October 2024 (Sharp P, Nicola Davies and Dingemans LJJ).

Titan Wealth Holdings Limited and others v Okunola, heard 9 and 10 October 2024

Northcott v Hundeyin, heard 8 October 2024 (Knowles J)

Codnor v Thorpe, 17 June 2024 (Richard Spearman KC).

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 an advocacy advisor at Big Brother Watch.