Journalism: The danger of crusades – FC Reporting Watch

5 09 2019

In the last few months, the Daily Express has been running a ‘Crusade’ (their label) with the banner ‘End This Injustice’. Under this banner they have published a number of accounts from mothers who tell of abuse at the hands of the fathers of their children, and a failure by the Family Court to protect them. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Pinto Coelho v. Portugal (No.2), Open Justice, Article 10 and Broadcasting recordings of hearings – Hugh Tomlinson QC

26 03 2016

18726989_VefAtIn the case of Pinto Coelho v Portugal (No.2) ([2016] ECHR 296)(only in French) the Fourth Section of the Court of Human Rights held (by a 6:1 majority) that the imposition of a fine on a journalist who had published unauthorised audio recordings of a criminal trial was a breach of Article 10.  The case has potentially wide implications for jurisdictions such as England and Wales which continue to prohibit the transmission of recordings of criminal trials. Read the rest of this entry »





Ireland: Court reports and defamation – Eoin O’Dell

8 02 2016

320px-CriminalCourtofJusticeDublinBefore Christmas, the Attorney-General called for a debate on the question of whether reports of court proceedings should be actionable in defamation only if there is proof of malice. Putting her money where her mouth is, she has now referred the matter to the Law Reform Commission (Irish Legal News |Irish Times). Read the rest of this entry »





Ireland: Reform of defamation, court reports – Eoin O’Dell

8 01 2016

320px-CriminalCourtofJusticeDublinOn 18 December 2015 the Attorney General, Máire Whelan, called for a debate on the question of whether reports of court proceedings should be actionable in defamation only if there is proof of malice (Irish Independent |Irish Times | RTE). Read the rest of this entry »





Case Comment: R (Press Association) v Cambridge Crown Court – Anonymity and sexual offences – Edward Craven

12 12 2012

Victims of rape and other serious sexual crimes are entitled to lifelong anonymity under the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992. It is sometimes suggested that defendants in sex cases should enjoy similar protection until they are convicted at trial. However in a novel twist, a judge recently went one step further and ordered the anonymisation of a convicted rapist in order to protect the identity of his victim. Read the rest of this entry »