Apple is to remove its highest level of data protection from customers in the UK following a government demand for access to user data. The Advanced Data Protection (ADP) tool, which is used to protect “majority” of iCloud data, will be withdrawn from Apple users in the UK.

Earlier this month, the government issued an order under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016, asking for the ability to access fully encrypted files from Apple users. Cybersecurity experts have warned that the move will weaken iCloud security and make UK users “vulnerable” to cyber threats and malicious exploitation. Privacy International sets out its concerns here and here. The Verge, Independent and the BBC have more information.

On 19 February 2025 Nicklin J handed down a 109 page, 407 paragraph,  judgment in the long running case of MBR Acres v FREE THE MBR BEAGLES [2025] EWHC 331 (KB) (heard 24-28 April 2023, 2-5, 9, 11-12, 15, 17-18, 22-23 May 2023, 23 June 2023, 26 March and 7 May 2024).   There have been six previous judgments in this litigation (see [12]).

The claim was against protestors at the First Claimant’s Wyton Site in Cambridge where animal are bred for testing and research.  The claim against the defendant, John Curtin, in trespass and interference with site access succeeded and an injunction was granted.  The other claims against him were dismissed.  A contra mundum injunction was granted against persons unknown threatening trespass and obstruction of access at the Wyton Site.  Mr Curtin was fined £90 for contempt as a result of a breach of an interim injunction.  A copy of the Judge’s order [pdf] has been posted on the Judiciary website.

“Camp Beagle” has been in placed since 2021, with Mr Curtin living in a tent outside the site.  There were reports of the case in the Daily Mail and the Independent where Mr Curtin described the judgment as a victory of David over Goliath.

Internet and Social Media

In response rumours circulating online, Reuters has published a Fact Check confirming that First lady Melania Trump did not win a $900 million defamation lawsuit against “The View” talk show and one of its hosts Sunny Hostin. A search of court records showed no evidence of such a lawsuit involving the first lady. An ABC spokesperson said the information is false.

Data privacy and data protection

South Korea has accused Chinese AI startup DeepSeek of sharing user data with the owner of TikTok in China. The country had already removed DeepSeek from app stores over the weekend over data protection concerns. The BBC, MalwareBytes and CGTN have more information.

Surveillance

The Pogo Was Right blog has published an article examining the global surveillance capabilities (and realities) of the deeply interconnected global technological infrastructure. The piece explains how modern surveillance capabilities have evolved into a complex, global web that makes traditional jurisdictional boundaries increasingly irrelevant. The reality is that sophisticated monitoring systems operate far beyond official alliances, with capabilities that were not publicly known until decades after their implementation.

Newspaper Journalism and regulation

On 19 February 2025, the cross-party Women and Equalities Committee’s report on The Rights of Older People was published and criticised IPSO for the lack of provisions to protect the public from ageism in the press. The report finds that the omission of ageism from the Editors’ Code “…[leaves] older people unprotected and [contributes] to a widely held perception that ageism is taken less seriously than other forms of discrimination.” Hacked Off has more information here.

Events

There will be a symposium entitled “The Future of SLAPPs Research,” at the London School of Economics (LSE) on 12 June 2025. This event, organised by the SLAPPs Research Group, is generously supported by the LSE Law School and the Faculty of Law at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand. More information available here.

IPSO

Statements in open court and apologies

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

New Issued cases

There was one defamation (libel and slander) claim and three miscellaneous claims filed on the media and communications list last week.

Last week in the courts

On Tuesday 18 February 2025, there was an appeal hearing in the case of Mullen v Lyles KA-2024-000119.

On the same day, judgment was handed down by Bourne J in Kostakopoulou v University of Warwick & Ors [2025] EWHC 342. An extended civil restraint order has been issued against Kostakopoulou to prevent further claims in this final instalment of litigation brought by her against the University of Warwick and others, which began in 2017. The present claim dealt with an order issued by Sir Andrew Nicol in December 2021, which struck out Kostakopoulou’s libel and malicious falsehood claim against the University and others. Mr Justice Bourne struck out the attempt by Kostakopoulou to rescind parts of Sir Andrew Nicol’s order, in which she alleged his decisions were obtained by fraud. Bourne J said there was “absolutely no doubt” the threshold for an ECRO was met [186]. The Law Society Gazette has more information here.

On 19 February 2025 Nicklin J handed down judgment in the case of MBR Acres v FREE THE MBR BEAGLES (heard 24-28 April 2023, 2-5, 9, 11-12, 15, 17-18, 22-23 May 2023, 23 June 2023, 26 March and 7 May 2024).   The First Claimant’s claim against the defendant, John Curtin, in trespass and interference with site access succeeded and an injunction was granted.  The other claims were dismissed

On Thursday 20 February 2025, there was a trial of a preliminary issue in the case of Prospect v Evans KB-2024-000030.

On Friday 21 February 2025, judgment was handed down by the Court of Appeal in Clarke v Guardian News & Media Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 164. The claimant is Noel Clarke, a well-known actor, screenwriter, producer and director. His primary claim in libel and data protection relates to several articles published by the defendants that allege a pattern of sexual misconduct and bullying by the claimant. This appeal concerned an application to amend the appeal (the “Amendment Application”) to join a further six defendants and to re-amend the claim by adding a new cause of action against all seven defendants for conspiracy to injure by unlawful means, expanding Clarke’s claim for special damages to claim for over £70 million, and adding a claim for exemplary or punitive damages; this issue was adjourned by way of a short extempore judgment last month [21]. The claimant’s primary ground of appeal was that the judge was wrong in law to adjourn the hearing of the Amendment Application until after the conclusion of the trial. He argued that the decision was arrived at in breach of the rules of natural justice, that it was illogical, and that it will stifle the claimant’s legitimate claim in unlawful means conspiracy. However, Warby LJ found that the claimant had fallen a long way short of establishing that the judge’s decision offends the principles of natural justice, deprived him of any chance of a fair trial of his conspiracy claim, or removed his chances of legitimate vindication [41]. The claimant’s central complaint is that he will be unfairly muzzled at the Liability Trial because the scope for cross-examination will be unduly restricted, compared with what would be possible at a full trial of all the issues which the claimant wants to pursue. However, in this claim the issues between the parties include the truth of what was said, and whether those responsible for the offending publications honestly and reasonably believed it was in the public interest to publish it. It would be open to the claimant to put it to the 22 women to be called in support of the defence of truth, that they are telling lies and that the reason is that they were parties to a conspiracy or arrangement to tell lies to injure the claimant [42]. There was nonetheless acknowledgement by the Court of Appeal that the decision to adjourn the application was unusual, but ultimately “not outside the generous ambit of her case management discretion” [48]. The Press Gazette, Guardian, Independent and BBC have more information. Matrix has a summary here.

Media law in other jurisdictions

Australia

The LSE Media Blog has an article explaining the context behind Australian ban on social media for under-16s and discusses whether it is actually likely to work.

Ireland

The Cearta.ie Blog has a new article on the Defamation (Amendment) Bill 2024, which has been restored to the Dáil Order Paper, and will therefore continue its journey through the Oireachtas.

United States

The Trump administration’s fast-moving efforts to limit the size of federal bureaucracy, primarily through the recently minted Department of Government Efficiency, are raising privacy and data security concerns among current and former officials across the government, particularly as the administration scales back positions charged with privacy oversight. Efforts to limit the independence of a host of federal agencies through a new executive order — including the independence of the Federal Trade Commission and Securities and Exchange Commission — are also ringing alarm bells among civil society and some legal experts. IAPP provides analysis here.

A federal judge declined to dismiss invasion of privacy claims from a family who say San Diego County officials used cameras to spy on a minor patient for over a month in a San Diego children’s hospital. Courthouse News has more information here.

Research and Resources

Next week in the courts

On  Monday 24 February 2025 there will be a statement in open court in the case of Vince v Associated Newspapers KB-2024-004147 will be read before Fordham J.

On Thursday 27 February 2025 there will be an adjourned disposal hearing in the case of Wei v Long KB-2023-003483  and a PTR in the case of O’Carroll v Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd KB-2022-004365.

On Friday 28 February 2025 there will be the hearing of an adjourned application by the claimant in the case of Notting Hill Genesis v Kakpur KB-2025-000140 .

Reserved judgements

Ware v Waters & another, heard 10 February 2025, (Eady J)

Miller v Peake, heard 18 to 20 November 2024 (HHJ Parkes KC)

Vince v Tice and Vince v Staines heard 11 November 2024 (Pepperall J)

Secretary of State for Education v Marples, 4 November 2024, (Sir Peter Lane)

This Round Up was compiled by Colette Allen, the host of Newscast on Dr Thomas Bennett and Professor Paul Wragg’s The Media Law Podcast (@MediaLawPodcast).