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 »





On its 10th Anniversary, Here are 10 Reasons to be Concerned about the “Extreme” Pornography Law – Tara Beattie

10 02 2019

Last month saw in the tenth anniversary of the “Extreme” Pornography Possession Offence coming into force. This means that English and Welsh citizens could find themselves liable to a three-year spell in jail, and registered as a sex offender, for watching adult pornography in the privacy of their homes.  Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Mătăsaru v Moldova, Activist’s conviction for hooliganism over ‘obscene’ protest violated Article 10 – Ronan Ó Fathaigh and Dirk Voorhoof

26 01 2019

On 15 January 2019, in Mătăsaru v. the Republic of Moldova ([2019] ECHR 35) the Court of Human Rights, Second Section unanimously found that an anti-corruption activist’s conviction for staging an “obscene” demonstration outside a prosecutor’s office, targeting a number of public officials, violated the activist’s freedom of expression. Read the rest of this entry »





Your right to know: how Australia’s defamation law stifles public-interest journalism – Richard Ackland

2 01 2019

Charles Blondin (aka Jean François Gravelet) was a tightrope acrobat who reached peak fame when he successfully walked on a rope strung across Niagara gorge in 1859. The nerve-wracking trip was 340 metres long and the rope was set 49 metres above the waters below. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Magyar Jeti Zrt v. Hungary: ECtHR rules on hyperlinking to defamatory content – Oliver Fairhurst

14 12 2018

On 4 December 2018, the European Court of Human Rights provided some helpful clarification on the potential liability for posting hyperlinks to defamatory content in the case of Magyar Jeti Zrt v. Hungary. In doing so, the Court referred to the ever-growing corpus of European Union law concerning the concept of “communication to the public” contained in Article 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive 2001/29/EC. Read the rest of this entry »





Philip Green Injunction: is anonymity for celebrities really worth the potential backlash? – Ashley Hurst and Alex Vakil

4 11 2018

The disclosure by Lord Hain in Parliament that Sir Philip Green was the individual who had obtained an anonymous privacy injunction against the Telegraph has once again cast doubt on the effectiveness of such injunctions against the press. Read the rest of this entry »





The Peter Hain Case: Parliamentary Privilege and Article IX of the Bill of Rights – Robert Craig

2 11 2018

Peter Hain’s decision to breach an interim injunction granted by the Court of Appeal in the case of ABC v Telegraph Media Group has caused serious concern. It is one of the cardinal rules in Parliament that members should not interfere in ongoing legal proceedings and Hain did not wait until the end of the proceedings before breaching this injunction, even though the case had been scheduled for an early full hearing. He does not appear even to have read the court judgment he saw fit to overrule, effectively. Read the rest of this entry »





Why Lord Hain was wrong to disclose Sir Philip Green’s name – Tom Double

29 10 2018

Lord Hain’s decision to name Sir Philip Green in the House of Lords as the individual who obtained an interim-injunction against the Daily Telegraph has polarised opinion.  Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Savva Terentyev v Russia, Conviction for inciting hatred against the police violated blogger’s freedom of expression – Dirk Voorhoof

11 10 2018

In Savva Terentyev v. Russia the ECtHR has applied a very high level of free speech-protection for aggressively insulting and hostile comments about police officers, published on a weblog. The ECtHR observes that some of the wording in the blog post was offensive, insulting and virulent, but it found that the (emotional and sarcastic) comments as a whole could not be seen as inciting to hatred or violence. Read the rest of this entry »





A Lord Chamberlain for the internet? Thanks, but no thanks – Graham Smith

10 10 2018

This summer marked the fiftieth anniversary of the Theatres Act 1968, the legislation that freed the theatres from the censorious hand of the Lord Chamberlain of Her Majesty’s Household. Thereafter theatres needed to concern themselves only with the general laws governing speech. In addition they were granted a public good defence to obscenity and immunity from common law offences against public morality. Read the rest of this entry »