Case Law: R (Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal, Parliament’s “ouster” of High Court judicial review powers is not binding – Omar Qureshi, Dan Tench and Cathryn Hopkins

23 05 2019

On 15 May 2019, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the case of R (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal ([2019] UKSC 22), deciding by a slim majority of 4:3 that an “ouster clause” in section 67(8) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (“RIPA”) that purports to exclude from challenge or appeal any decision of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (“IPT”), does not prevent a judicial review challenge based on an error of law. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Prior restraint of campaigning for a peaceful but unauthorised demonstration violated Article 10 – Ronan Ó Fathaigh and Dirk Voorhoof

18 05 2019

On 30 April 2019, in Kablis v. Russia, the Third Section of the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”) unanimously found that the blocking by Russian authorities of an activist’s social networking account and entries on his blog had breached his right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Høiness v Norway, Refusal to impose liability for anonymous comments online did not breach Article 8 – Samuel Rowe

14 05 2019

In a judgment handed down on 19 March 2019 (Høiness v Norway, no 43624/14), the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”) refused to impose liability on an Internet forum for anonymous comments that had been published on its site. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Australia: Chau v Fairfax Media Publications PL, Philanthropist Wins Round One – Justin Castelan

4 05 2019

Dr Chau Chak Wing is a wealthy Chinese-born Australian citizen. He has extensive business interests in China and is a very generous philanthropist. He has donated enormous sums of money to a number of universities and public institutions in Australia, as well as having made donations to the main political parties in Australia. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law Update: Five recent media law judgments

25 04 2019

In the last week of the Hilary Legal Term, after our last weekly round up, five media law judgments were handed down.  Two by the Court of Appeal and three at first instance.  These deal with a number of important issues, particularly in the field of privacy. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Ali v Channel 5, Can’t pay? Court of Appeal does not take claimants’ damages away (but neither will it increase them) – Tom Double

24 04 2019

In Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcasting Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 677, the Court of Appeal considered whether countervailing privacy and the public interest/freedom of expression rights had been properly balanced, together with the appropriate award of privacy damages arising from footage of an eviction shown on Channel 5, the Defendant in this action. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Boyd v Ineos, “Persons unknown” injunctions against future protest action – Charlotte Gilmartin

23 04 2019

In Boyd & Anor v Ineos Upstream Ltd & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 515, the Court of Appeal handed down a fascinating judgment exploring the tension between the exercise of the rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of expression and the protection of property rights. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law:  Stocker v Stocker, Supreme Court overturns Judge on meaning of “tried to strangle” – Oliver Cox

5 04 2019

On 3 April 2019 the Supreme Court gave its judgment in Stocker v Stocker [2019] UKSC 17. The five Supreme Court judges (Lord Reed, Lord Kerr, Lady Black, Lord Briggs and Lord Kitchin) unanimously overturned the 12 February 2018 Court of Appeal decision given by Lady Justice Sharp, Lord Justice McFarlane and Sir John Laws ([2018] EWCA Civ 170). Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Australia: O’Reilly v Edgar, Fact free Facebook Posts, $250,000 damages – Gabrielle Hunter

24 03 2019

In the case of O’Reilly v Edgar ([2019] QSC 24) the Supreme Court of Queensland awarded Kelvin O’Reilly, the CEO of a go-kart racing organisation, $270 658.71 in damages, including aggravated damages, for defamatory posts by a Facebook troll. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Venables v News Group Papers, Application to Vary Confidentiality Injunction Dismissed, PJS extended – Samuel Rowe

13 03 2019

On 4 March 2019, the decision in Venables & Anor v News Group Papers Ltd & Ors ([2019] EWHC 494 (Fam)) was handed down.  The case concerned an application to vary a confidentiality injunction which had been ordered in 2001, restricting identification of Jon Venables. Read the rest of this entry »