Case Comment: PJS v NGN, Supreme Court restores interim injunction in landmark privacy case – Sara Mansoori and Aidan Wills.

26 05 2016

Supreme CourtOn 19 May 2016, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in PJS v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2016] UKSC 26. This much-discussed privacy action brought by a celebrity has generated renewed debate on privacy injunctions. Read the rest of this entry »





“Free speech drowning”? – Supreme Court decision to reinstate PJS injunction, a news Round Up

20 05 2016

Sun Front PageThe decision of the Supreme Court to reinstate the injunction in the case of PJS v News Group Newspapers ([2016] UKSC 26) has, unsurprisingly, attracted widespread comment, both in press and on social media. We had a summary of the case and a post by Ashley Hurst. Read the rest of this entry »





PJS v NGN: Supreme Court stands behind anonymised celebrity injunction – Ashley Hurst

19 05 2016

Ashley HurstIn what many will see as a shock judgment, the Supreme Court has resisted massive media, internet, and political pressure and upheld an anonymised privacy injunction which protects the identity of a celebrity couple. Read the rest of this entry »





News: Supreme Court allows appeal in PJS “celebrity injunction case”

19 05 2016

PJS Supreme CourtIn a judgment handed down today the UK Supreme Court, by a majority of 4:1, allowed the claimant’s appeal in the case of PJS v News Group Newspapers ([2016] UKSC 26). Read the rest of this entry »





News: Supreme Court will give judgment in privacy injunction case of PJS v News Group on 19 May 2016

16 05 2016

PJS Court of AppealThe UK Supreme Court has announced that it will hand down judgment in the case of PJS v News Group Newspapers Limited at 9.30am on Thursday 19 May 2016.  The “hand down bench” for the judgment will be Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale and Lord Mance. Read the rest of this entry »





News: PJS injunction appeal, Supreme Court reserves judgment, injunction remains in place

21 04 2016

PJS Court of AppealThe Supreme Court today heard the application and appeal in the case of PJS v News Group Newspapers – following the decision of the Court of Appeal on Monday ([2016] EWCA Civ 393) to discharge the injunction it had granted in January because it had ceased to have practical effect. Read the rest of this entry »





News: UK Supreme Court holds that CFA regime is compatible with Human Rights Convention

22 07 2015

uksccrest2_400x400The UK Supreme Court today handed down judgment in the case of Coventry v Lawrence ([2015] UKSC 50) [pdf]. By a majority of 5:2 the Court held that the conditional fee and after the event insurance regime brought in by the Access to Justice Act 1999 (“the AJA regime”) was compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. Read the rest of this entry »





JR 38 in the UK Supreme Court: the scope of Article 8 ECHR or why Lord Kerr is right – Sophie Stalla-Bourdillon

10 07 2015

In its judgement In the matter of an application by JR38 for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) [2015] UKSC 42, the UK Supreme Court held that the publication of photographs of a minor (just about 14 years old at the time of publication) suspected of involvement in criminal activities did not constitute a breach of his right to respect for his private life protected by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, India: Shreya Singhal v Union of India: Law on offensive communications ruled unconstitutional – Jonathan McCully

3 04 2015

SupremeCourtIndia1On 24 March 2015, the Supreme Court of India ruled on the constitutionality of various provisions in India’s Information Technology Act 2000 in Shreya Singhal v Union of India W.P. (Crim.) No 167 of 2012. Most notably, the Supreme Court held that India’s law on offensive communications was unconstitutional as it was liable to be used in a way that would unnecessarily curb freedom of speech and expression. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: R (Catt) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, Public Protest, Private Rights – Dominic Ruck Keene

15 03 2015

john-catt_2509902bIn the case of R (Catt) and R (T) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis ([2015] UKSC 9) a majority of the Supreme Court held that the retention by police of information on the Domestic Extremism Database about a 91 year-old activist’s presence at political protests was (1) in accordance with the law and (2) a proportionate interference with his right to a private life under Article 8(1) of the ECHR. Read the rest of this entry »