Case Law: Butt v Home Secretary, Honest Opinion Defence Clarified – Samuel Rowe

10 07 2019

On 6 June 2019, judgment in an appeal brought by Dr Salman Butt against the Home Secretary was handed down by the Court of Appeal ([2019] EWCA Civ 933).  The case concerned an action in libel which had arisen from the publication of a press release on the government’s Prevent policy. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Comment: Advertising Standards Authority v Mitchell, the Perils of the Misdirected Email – Oscar Davies

3 07 2019

The case of Advertising Standards Authority v Mitchell ([2019] EWHC 1469 (QB)) deals with the problem of a misdirected email.  We have all sent an email to the wrong person, realising only moments after sending it.  Warby J considers the perils of such a situation, and how the court may step in if the receiving party refuses to undertake not to use the information. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Kennedy v National Trust for Scotland: No pictures, please, Scotland versus England as a forum for defamation cases – Dan Tench, Emma Boffey, Graeme MacLeod and Jo Clark

18 06 2019

The Court of Appeal in England & Wales has handed down its judgment in the matter of Howard Kennedy v The National Trust for Scotland [2019] EWCA Civ 648, on appeal from the decision of Sir David Eady, sitting as a judge of the High Court on the Queen’s Bench Division Media and Communications List. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Spicer v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, Headlines must be read in context – Oscar Davies

15 06 2019

In the case of Spicer v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2019] EWHC 1439 (QB) Warby J held that an article’s headline, however defamatory, must be read in context, with the text of the article, in order to arrive at the natural and ordinary meaning. The judgment provides a useful exposition of the ‘bane and antidote’ principle. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, South Africa: Manuel v Economic Freedom Fighters, The legal consequences of fake news – Dario Milo

6 06 2019

“Fake news” – a term ironically made popular by Donald Trump – is a real problem for our democracy.  This is not news which the publisher reasonably believes to be true because, for example, steps have been taken to verify the information. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Australia: Raynor v Murray, Torrid times at the Watermark flats – Gabrielle Hunter

4 06 2019

In the case of Raynor v Murray ([2019] NSWDC 189) the District Court of NSW ordered Patricia Murray, a tenant of Manly residential flats known as “Watermark”, to pay damages of $120,000 to the chairman of the building’s strata committee for a defamatory email regarding an unlocked mailbox. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: ZXC v Bloomberg, Publication of investigation into businessman was a misuse of private information – Nathan Capone

3 06 2019

In the case of ZXC v Bloomberg LP ([2019] EWHC 970 (QB)) a businessman was awarded damages of £25,000 for misuse of private information after media organisation Bloomberg published an article citing confidential information obtained from a UK law enforcement agency which identified the businessman. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Allen v Times Newspapers, Meaning determination in “Grenfell” libel claim – Oscar Davies

28 05 2019

In the case of Allen v Times Newspapers Ltd [2019] EWHC 1235 (QB) Warby J found that an article concerning Mark Allen, described as a ‘Grenfell cladding boss’, bore a defamatory meaning which was different from that contended for by the parties. Read the rest of this entry »





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 »