The Supreme Court decision in Flood, Miller and Frost: a defence lawyer’s perspective – Keith Mathieson

12 04 2017

The use of CFAs in cases against the media had become a scandal long before this appeal was heard.  A mechanism intended to provide access to justice had become a gravy train for claimant lawyers.  As claimant lawyers know, the mere threat of a CFA and ATE insurance could be used to bulldoze a media company into submission. Read the rest of this entry »





With ‘no-win-no-fee’ deals harder to get in libel cases, government must choose whether to back the corporate press or the ordinary citizen – Brian Cathcart

12 04 2017

The Supreme Court has dismissed appeals brought by the Murdoch, Mail and Mirror newspaper companies in relation to costs they must pay in libel and privacy cases they have lost – but at the same time the judges have thrown the future of access to justice in such cases into the lap of the government. Read the rest of this entry »





A Flood of CFAs? Looking ahead to the UKSC’s additional liabilities judgment and its implications for media lawyers – Aidan Wills

9 02 2017

510-supreme-court-1From 24 to 26 January 2017, the Supreme Court heard three joined appeals raising the issue as to whether the recovery of conditional fee agreement (“CFA”) success fees and after the event insurance (“ATE”) premiums (collectively known as “additional liabilities”) in publication and privacy cases is incompatible with Article 10 of the Convention. Inforrm published a case preview here. Read the rest of this entry »





Press companies ask Supreme Court to ensure only millionaires can sue them – Brian Cathcart

30 01 2017

Press on SaleSometimes, even after all these years of press lies and hypocrisy, the shamelessness of the big British newspaper companies can still take the breath away. Last week lawyers for the Murdoch, Mirror and Mail papers complained to the Supreme Court that costs in some media cases amounted to a ‘legal casino’ in which the bills could be so high that there was a ‘chilling effect’ on journalism. As a result, they argued, freedom of expression was endangered. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Preview: Times Newspapers Limited v Flood; Frost and others v MGN Limited; Miller v Associated Newspapers Limited – Aidan Wills

26 01 2017

510-supreme-court-1The Supreme Court is currently hearing three joined appeals brought by media organisations challenging the Convention compatibility of the recoverability of conditional fee agreement (CFA) success fees/uplift and after the event (ATE) insurance premiums (“additional liabilities”) in libel and privacy claims. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Preview: PNM v Times Newspapers, Open justice and the privacy of suspects – Hugh Tomlinson QC

14 01 2017

830thetimesOn 17 and 18 January 2017, a seven judge Supreme Court will hear the claimant’s appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of PNM v Times Newspapers ([2014] EWCA Civ 1132).  Read the rest of this entry »





News: Supreme Court CFA appeals to be heard over 3 days in January 2017

4 10 2016

uksccrest2_400x400The joined appeals in Flood v Times Newspapers and Miller v Associated Newspapers in which the press arguing that CFA success fees and ATE insurance are contrary to Article 10 have been listed for a three day hearing on 24, 25 and 26 January 2017. Read the rest of this entry »





News: Supreme Court gives Mail permission to appeal in human rights challenge to CFAs

5 09 2016

UKSC-exteriorOn 2 August 2016, the Supreme Court (Lords Mance, Clarke and Wilson) gave the Daily Mail permission to appeal [pdf] in the case of Miller v Associated Newspapers Ltd, a human rights challenge to CFA success fees and ATE insurance. Read the rest of this entry »





Suffer the Little Children…The Supremes, the Internet and PJS – Robin Callender Smith

3 06 2016

Sun PJSIssues of world-wide identification and information on the internet in respect of privacy rights, celebrities and English law reignited in January this year. The Sun on Sunday began its attempt to tell readers about PJS’s ‘three-way’ with A and B with the full knowledge of his married partner YMA. Read the rest of this entry »





The Courts Both Uphold the Rule of Law and Prioritise the Human Rights of Individuals and Children Over the Commercial Interests of the Tabloid Press – Jonathan Coad

31 05 2016

Sun PJSThe PJS v NGN injunction case is just another ugly example of a paid tabloid betrayal/kiss-and- tell story without a shred of genuine public interest while of considerable financial value to both the betrayer and the newspaper. Rarely does a legal case receive so much press attention as when tabloids are outraged by their inability to report on a celebrity threesome they claim is of interest to the public (rather than of legitimate public interest). Read the rest of this entry »