Over 30 Met Police officers raided a Quaker Meeting House to arrest 6 members of the activist group, Youth Demand, who have been carrying out acts of civil disobedience since last year. The arrests, which came amid concerns about plans to disrupt London next month with tactics like roadblocks, have drawn criticism in relation to the right to freedom of expression and assembly.

In a statement, Quakers in Britain emphasised “Quakers support the right to non-violent public protest.” The BBC, Sky News, The Spectator, The London Evening Standard, The New York Times, The Independent and The Daily Mail reported.

President Trump has stated that he will sign an executive order to grant TikTok a second 75-day extension to comply with a law passed by Congress requiring the Chinese owned company, ByteDance to either sell its US operations or face a ban. The extension aims to allow time for an agreement, with Trump explaining that “the Deal requires more work to ensure all necessary approvals are signed” on his Truth Social platform. The previous US administration raised security concerns about TikTok being used for spying or political manipulation, but critics of the ban have suggested that it should remain open for reasons of free speech. The BBC, The Independent, FT, Guardian, LBC, Al Jazeera and NBC and EuroNews covered the extentsion.

The government has abandoned plans to force tech platforms to remove ‘legal but harmful’ content amid concerns that it would be perceived as a crackdown on free speech by the Trump administration, jeopardising trade negotiations. Following a review of the Online Safety Act, which was undertaken after the Southport riots last summer, Labour have shelved the plans in favour of strengthening protections for children online, The Telegraph reports.

Internet and Social Media

Mischon de Reya has a blog post on the illegal harms duties under the Online Safety Act 2023 which came into force on 17 March 2025. Platforms must address criminal content on their services and Ofcom will assess their compliance.

The LSE Media Blog has an article exploring the Western bias in research into the issues of misinformation and disinformation, as well as the use of AI tools to combat the problem. It suggests that global policies negligent the social, cultural and political factors motivating actors in the Global South to post harmful online content and often ignore the offline aspect of the problem.

Data privacy and data protection

The European Union is set to overhaul the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) as part of its broader push to reduce regulatory burdens on businesses, according to Politico. The European Commission is planning to propose changes to simplify GDPR, aiming to make it less complex and easier for companies to comply with. Justice Commissioner, McGrath confirmed last week that the proposals are due in the “coming weeks.” Lexology, Kennedys Law and Lewis Silkin have analysis of the potential implications of the changes.

Surveillance

Asda has launched a two-month trial of live facial recognition in five stores across Greater Manchester to reduce retail crime, scanning shoppers’ faces and comparing them to a database of individuals with criminal records. The pilot has been met with criticism from campaigners who describe it as “disproportionate” and an invasion of privacy. Asda’s press release is available here. The Independent, ITV news, South Wales Guardian, Biometric Update, Retail Gazette The Lancashire Telegraph and The Grocer covered the development.

Newspaper Journalism and regulation

Actress, Kate Beckinsale had a Mail Online story about her taken down following a complaint to the press regulator, IPSO, the Press Gazette reported. Beckinsale objected to a July diary piece in the Daily Mail, claiming it misrepresented her comments and gave the false impression that her weight loss was linked to her mother’s cancer. She also argued that the reporter misled her into sharing private information at a charity event. While the Mail offered a print correction and an apology, Beckinsale rejected it and escalated the complaint to IPSO. The Mail ultimately removed the online article and issued a further apology.

IPSO

Statements in open court and apologies

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

New Issued cases

There were no claims filed on the media and communications list last week.

Last week in the courts

The trial of the defamation and data protection case of Clarke v Guardian QB-2022-001397 continued before Steyn J.

On Monday 31 March 2025, there was a costs appeal in Vardy v Rooney KA-2024-000200 before Cavanagh J and an assessor.

On the same day there was a preliminary issues trial before Yip J in  Aurang Zeeb v Ali KB-2023-003544 and application in Ness v Miller KB-2025-000232 before Aidan Eardley KC.

On Wednesday 2 April 2025,  Deputy High Court Judge Susie Alegre handed down judgmnet in the case of HCRG Care Ltd v Persons Unknown [2025] EWHC 794 (KB).  The judge ordered the continuation of an interim injunction against persons unknown in relation to a breach of confidence claim following a cyber-attack involving the theft of sensitive personal data and a request for ransom along with a threat to share the data more widely.

On the same day there was a hearing in Scalora v Clarion Housing Associated KB-2023-003931.

On Thursday 3 April 2025, there was a hearing in HXZ v NMX.

On the same day, Nicklin J heard the preliminary issues trial in the case of Currie v Soho Theatre Company KB-2024-002293 and gave an ex-tempore judgement following submissions. Comedian, Paul Currie brought a libel claim against the Soho Theatre Company concerning a press statement published by the defendant in relation a confrontation with an audience member which took place after the performance of Currie’s show, “Shtoom” on 10 February 2024.

The court held that the press statement had the meaning that Currie had verbally abused Jewish members of the audience and aggressively demanded that they leave the theatre and that there were grounds to investigate whether he had committed a criminal offence – which was a statement of fact. The statement also expressed the opinion that Currie’s conduct was intimidating and antisemitic; appalling and unacceptable; and inconsistent with the defendant’s values, such that it justified refusing Currie future opportunities to perform. 5RB has a summary and the London Evening Standard reported on the hearing.

On Friday 4 April, there was a preliminary issues hearing before Jay J in the defamation case of Warren v Eubank Junior KB-2024-004317. Boxing promotor, Frank Warren is suing boxer Chris Eubank Jr for libel and slander after Eubank Jr called him a “scumbag” during a live press conference in Saudi Arabia last year that was subsequently shared online. Eubank Jr’s comments, made in response to a question about his decision to sign with another promoter, accused Warren of lying and cheating in boxing. Although Eubank Jr later apologized and retracted his statements, Warren proceeded with legal action, claiming the remarks suggested serious misconduct. At the conclusion of the hearing, Jay J strongly encouraged both parties to mediate the dispute. The Sun, the London Evening Standard, MSN and LBC covered the hearing. 5RB has a summary.  Jay J later gave a short judgment on meaning (Warren v Eubank [2025] EWHC 828 (KB))

Media law in other jurisdictions

Australia

On 1 April 2025, the District Court of Queensland handed down judgement in the case of Mitchell v Jobst [2025] QDC 41 in favour of the plaintiff. Mitchell, the plaintiff is a well-known figure in the gaming community, having broken a number of world records in video and arcade gaming. Jobst, a professional YouTuber, defamed Mitchell by publishing a video in which he accused Mitchell of being a major contributing factor in the death of YouTuber, Apollo Legend. Before Legend’s death, Mitchell had filed a lawsuit against him in relation to accusations made by Legend that Mitchell cheated in his world records. The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the plaintiff had a settled bad reputation which was not damaged further by the video. The plaintiff was awarded $300,000 in general damages for non-economic loss and $50,000 in aggravated damages. The Guardian, The Courier Mail, The Gamer and Lawerly covered the judgement.

2025, the Federal Court of Australia handed down judgement on costs in the defamation case of Greenwich v Latham (No 3) [2025] FCA 312. The defendant, former One Nation leader, Mark Latham, was ordered to pay the costs of the claimant, Independent Sydney MP, Alex Greenwich, following his successful defamation case last September in which he was awarded $140,000 in damages. Latham had published a homophobic tweet about his political rival, which led to hateful abuse and death threats being aimed at Greenwich. The Guardian, Daily Mail and The Sydney Morning Herald have more information.

Canada

On 31 March 2025, the Court of Appeal for BC handed down judgement in the case of Pineau v Glacier Media Inc., 2025 BCCA 101. The appellant filed separate lawsuits against two companies for defamatory articles that led to him being unable to find work in his field and the potential loss of a lucrative opportunity. In the first case, he was awarded $120,000 in general damages but no special damages, due to a lack of evidence on the lost opportunity. In the second case, the judge awarded $120,000 in general damages, reduced by 40% due to a prior apology and the previous damages award, and $180,000 in special damages for the lost job opportunity.

The appellant argued the reduction in general damages and the special damages assessment were incorrect, while the respondents cross-appealed, claiming insufficient pleadings for special damages. The appeal and cross-appeal were partly allowed, with the court agreeing on the general damage reduction but finding that the special damages were too low, increasing the award to $330,000 after accounting for the previous recovery.

Israel

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has filed a defamation lawsuit against Yair Golan, leader of The Democrats, after Golan accused him of selling the country’s security for money in the Qatargate scandal. Netanyahu claims Golan’s messages were false, inciting, and defamatory, and is seeking NIS 320,000 ($86,400) in damages, along with a court order to stop further defamation. In response, Golan expressed eagerness to question Netanyahu in court about the alleged Qatari money, listing several questions he intends to ask if given the opportunity. The Times of Israel and JNS have more information.

Kenya

The Kenyan High Court has granted permission for a case against Meta brought by two Ethiopian nationals to proceed, despite Meta’s arguments that there was no jurisdiction for the case to be heard in Kenya, where its moderators for Ethiopia were based at the time.

The case was brought by the son of a professor who was murdered in 2021 after his address was published on Facebook during the Ethiopian civil war and a former Amnesty International researcher, who received death threats on Facebook for her reports on acts of violence committed during the conflict. The claimants are seeking that Facebook alters its algorithm, hires more content moderators in Africa and establishes a “restitution fund” for victims of hate and violence incited on their platform. Reuters, the Guardian, and The Bureau of Investigative Journalism reports.

United States

Dr. Brian Morley, a former medical director at AmeriHealth Caritas, is suing comedian John Oliver for defamation after Oliver criticised his comments on the level of care disabled Medicaid recipients should receive, particularly regarding in-home nursing visits, during an episode of his talk show, “Last Week Tonight,” last April. Oliver allegedly misrepresented Morley’s statements, suggesting that he approved of leaving individuals in their own faeces for days. The Guardian, USA Today, LA Times, The Independent, Deadline, Fox News and Entertainment Weekly covered the lawsuit.

Research and Resources

Next week in the courts

The trial in the case of Clarke v Guardian Media  (QB-2022-001397) continues before Steyn J.   This is the sixth and last week of the trial.

Reserved judgements

Bridgen v Hancock, 12 March 2025 (Collins Rice J)

This Round Up was compiled by Jasleen Chaggar who is the Legal and Policy Officer at Big Brother Watch.