Media - 1998

The case shown here are derived from the lawindexpro case law database. lawindexpro is a low cost case law database, with over 260,000 case listings, and over 200,000 links to full text judgments. The free service below shows the core information on the case, but is restricted in several ways. A small proportion of cases do allow access to the full lawindexpro information. These cases are selected at random, and may be different on your next visit. The active links through to lawindexpro are extremely powerful allowing full access to all linked cases.  

This page lists 29 cases, and was prepared on 28 October 2012.

Regina -v- London North Industrial Tribunal, ex parte Associated Newspapers Ltd [1998] ICR 1212
1998 Keene J	Employment, Media	Casemap 1 Citers
	An Employment Tribunal considering applying the rule allowing a restriction on reporting a case, must have regard to the legislative purpose and also to the importance of the principles of freedom of the press and open justice.

Forbes -v- Smith and Another
14 Jan 1998 ChD	Administrative, Media
	Court judgments are public, not secret documents; A direction that a judgment was not to be reported, was insufficient to prevent publicity.

Alan Kenneth McKenzie Clark -v- Associated Newspapers Ltd [1998] EWHC Patents 345; [1998] 1 WLR 1558
21 Jan 1998 PatC Lightman J	Intellectual Property, Media	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	The claimant was a member of Parliament and an author. The defendant published a column which was said to give the impression that the claimant had written it. It was a parody. The claim was in passing off. Held: The first issue was whether a substantial number of readers had been misled. The deception must be more than momentary and inconsequential. A parody of writing style was capable of constituting the tort of passing off and being a breach of Copyright Act rights even though there was a clear attribution. Here the evidence supported the fact that the parody, which relied upon creating just enough, but not too much confusion, had crossed the line. It was sufficient to establish that one of the possible reasonable meanings of the publication would mislead a substantial number of people; but a single meaning was required for the statutory tort of false attribution of authorship.
	Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 84
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- Radio Authority, ex parte Wildman [1998] EWHC Admin 90
28 Jan 1998 Admn	Media
	Link[s] omitted

Hodgson & others -v- Imperial Tobacco Limited Gallagher Limited etc [1998] EWCA Civ 224; [1998] 1 WLR 1056; [1998] 2 All ER 673
12 Feb 1998 CA Lord Woolf MR, Aldous, Chadwick LJJ	Legal Professions, Media, Costs	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	A large number of plaintiffs brought actions against the defendants, three tobacco companies, claiming damages for personal injuries by reason of cancer which they claimed was caused by smoking cigarettes manufactured by the defendants. A hearing for directions was heard 'in chambers' and an issue arose as to what the parties could say about that hearing. The judge had not delivered a judgment, and had said that a copy of his directions could be released to the public, but that the parties and their advisers were not to make any comment to the media in relation to the litigation without the leave of the court. Held: Lawyers conducting cases under conditional fee agreements bear no different or greater risk of facing personal costs orders for that reason. If the statutory requirements are complied with the CFA will be valid and enforceable by the legal advisers against a client. If it materially departs from the legislative requirements, it will not be enforceable and will not be a CFA which is protected. It was wrong to impose order banning publicity for that reason. The issue arose (but was not fully argued) as to the disclosabiity of Conditional Fee Agreements. The court said that absent exceptional circumstances, unless and until the other partyapplies to make the legal advisers personally liable for costs, the existence or the terms of a CFA are of no relevance to the issues and the proceedings. They are therefore on that ground not required to be disclosed. Proceedings in chambers are described as being conducted "in private" and Lord Woolf described the principles referable to proceedings in chambers as including: "To disclose what occurs in chambers does not constitute a breach of confidence or amount to contempt so long as any comment which is made does not substantially prejudice the administration of justice." Lord Woolf said: "What has happened since the order has been made strongly suggests that it would have been preferable to have given all the directions which were made on 10 October in open court, together with a judgment explaining why they were made, so that it would not have been necessary for the legal advisers to communicate with the media in order to explain what had happened."
	Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 1995 (1995 N0 1675) - Courts and Legal Services Act 1990
	Link[s] omitted

Morford; Paul Bowling; James Morford Limited; Hanslope Limited -v-; NIC Rigby and East Anglian Daily Times Co Ltd [1998] EWCA Civ 263
17 Feb 1998 CA	Media
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- Brentwood Borough Council Ex Parte Peck [1998] EWCA Civ 296
19 Feb 1998 CA	Local Government, Media	Casemap 1 Cites
	Link[s] omitted

Kirk Brandon -v- (L) George O'Dowd (Professionally Known As Boy George); Sidgwick and Jackson Ltd; Virgin Records Ltd and EMI Virgin Music Ltd [1998] EWCA Civ 459; [1998] EWCA Civ 991
13 Mar 1998 CA	Media, Contract
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- Chief Constable of North Wales Police and Others Ex Parte Thorpe and Another; Regina -v- Chief Constable for North Wales Police Area and others ex parte AB and CB [1998] EWCA Civ 486; [1999] QB 396; [1999] QB 396; [1998] 2 FLR 571; [1998] 3 All ER 310; [1998] EWCA Civ 486; [1998] 3 WLR 57; [1998] 3 FCR 371; [1998] Fam Law 529; [1998] 3 FCR 371; [1998] Fam Law 529; [1998] 2 FLR 571; [1998] 3 All ER 310; [1998] 3 WLR 57
18 Mar 1998 CA Lord Woolf MR, Schiemann, Robert Walker LJJ	Police, Media, Human Rights, Administrative, Administrative, Information	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	AB and CB had been released from prison after serving sentences for sexual assaults on children. They were thought still to be very dangerous. They moved about the country to escape identification, and came to be staying on a campsite. The police sought to co-operate in the resettlement of the couple but felt they had to inform the camp-site owner, which they did by revealing the newspaper reports. Held: A disclosure of the identity of paedophile offenders to the public by the police, must only be done after opportunity for representations as to basis of information, but may be appropriate if there can be shown a pressing need. There is an acute tension between the interests of a former sex-offender and the interests of the community. Three issues were identified: (1) a presumption that information should not be disclosed, recognising (a) the effect on the ability of the convicted people to live a normal life; (b) the risk of violence to them; and (c) that disclosure might drive them underground. (2) There is a strong public interest in ensuring that police are able to disclose information about offenders where that is necessary for the prevention or detection of crime, or for the protection of young or other vulnerable people. (3) Each case should be considered carefully on its particular facts assessing the risk posed by the individual offender; the vulnerability of those who may be at risk; and the impact of disclosure on the offender. In making such assessment, the police should normally consult other relevant agencies (such as social services and the probation service). Lord Bingham CJ said: "When, in the course of performing its public duties, a public body (such as a police force) comes into possession of information relating to a member of the public, being information not generally available and potentially damaging to that member of the public if disclosed, the body ought not to disclose such information save for the purpose of and to the extent necessary for performance of its public duty or enabling some other public body to perform its public duty." and "Each case must be judged on its own facts. However, in doing this, it must be remembered that the decision to which the police have to come as to whether or not to disclose the identity of paedophiles to members of the public, is a highly sensitive one. Disclosure should only be made when there is a pressing need for that disclosure. Before reaching their decision as to whether to disclose the police require as much information as can reasonably practicably be obtained in the circumstances. In the majority of the situations which can be anticipated, it will be obvious that the subject of the possible disclosure will often be in the best position to provide information which will be valuable when assessing the risk." As to article 8: "Both under the Convention and as a matter of English administrative law, the police are entitled to use information when they reasonably conclude this is what is required (after taking into account the interests of the applicants), in order to protect the public and in particular children . . However, where the use in question is decided upon as a result of the exercise of an honest judgment of professional police officers, that will of itself, go a long way to establish its reasonableness." Buxton J said: "I do however consider that a wish that certain facts in one's past, however notorious at the time, should remain in that past is an aspect of the subject's private life sufficient at least to raise questions under article 8 of the Convention."
	European Convention on Human Rights 8 - European Convention on Human Rights 8
	Link[s] omitted

Brown -v- Director of Public Prosecutions
26 Mar 1998 QBD	Media
	Managing director having sole control of publishing company was liable as principal for disclosure by newspaper of name of rape complainant.
	Criminal Justice Act 1976 4

Aubry -v- Editions Vice-Versa Inc [1998] 1 SCR 591; (1998), 157 DLR (4th) 577; 78 CPR (3d) 289; (1998) 50 CRR (2d) 225
9 Apr 1998	Commonwealth, Media	Casemap
	(Supreme Court of Canada) Publication in a magazine of an unauthorised photograph of a 17 year old girl sitting on the steps of a public building had violated her right to respect for private life conferred under Article 5 of the 'Quebec Charter' of Human Rights and Freedoms.
	Link[s] omitted

Queen -v- Radio Authority ex parte Francis Wildman [1998] EWCA Civ 694
23 Apr 1998 CA	Media
	Link[s] omitted

Brown (Gordon) -v- Director of Public Prosecutions
29 Apr 1998 QBD	Media
	A managing director having sole control of a publishing company was liable as a principal for disclosure by his newspaper of the name of a rape complainant.
	Criminal Justice Act 1976 4

Regina -v- London (North) Industrial Tribunal Ex Parte Associated Newspapers Ltd (1998) IRLR 569
13 May 1998 QBD	Media, Employment
	A tribunal had erred in ordering that names of both complainant and respondent and of witnesses should be protected in a sexual harassment case. The power only exists in respect of the complainant and a 'person affected'. This group should not be extended. The imposition of general reporting restrictions on a sex discrimination case went beyond range of what was needed to protect the interests identified in the regulations to protect a someone not a party to the proceedings.
	Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993 (1993 No 2687) 14

General Medical Council -v- British Broadcasting Corporation [1998] EWCA Civ 949
10 Jun 1998 CA	Contempt of Court, Media, Health Professions
	For purposes of contempt of court, proceedings before the professional conduct committee of the General Medical Council were not a court which was accordingly not entitled to control reporting
	Link[s] omitted

Bunn -v- British Broadcasting Corporation and Another
23 Jun 1998 ChD	Media, Police
	A police interview under caution was confidential and was not to be reported in breach of that right of confidence, but the confidentiality was lost when the judge read the interview transcript in open court

Regina -v- Secretary of State for Health; Scientific Committee for Tobacco and Health ex parte Imperial Tobacco Limited; Gallaher Limited; Rothmans (Uk) Limited and British American Tobacco Investments Limited [1998] EWHC Admin 712
6 Jul 1998 Admn	European, Media, Health	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	Link[s] omitted

Reynolds TD -v- Times Newspapers Ltd; Ruddock and Witherow [1998] 3 All ER 961; [1998] EWCA Civ 1172; [1998] 3 WLR 862
8 Jul 1998 CA Lord Bingham of Cornhill LCJ, Hirst LJ, Robert Walker LJ	Defamation, Media	Casemap 1 Citers
	The claimant, the former Taoiseach of Ireland sought damages after the defendant newspaper published an article falsely accusing him of duplicity. The paper said that his position meant that they should have the defence of quaified privilege available. Held: Qualified privilege defence applied in defamation proceedings reporting acts of public officials where there appeared a duty to publish, a proper public interest in hearing the allegations and proper reporting procedures (even though the allegations might be false). The court set clearer guidelines for the characteristics of the defence of qualified privilege in defamation actions. The statements must be made honestly, under a legal social or moral duty, satisfying a proper public interest, and the material must warrant protection.
	European Convention on Human Rights
	Link[s] omitted

Norowzian -v- Arks Limited and Others [1999] EMLR 67; [1998] EWHC 315 (Ch); [1999] FSR 79
17 Jul 1998 ChD Rattee J	Media, Intellectual Property	Casemap 1 Citers
	A film whose defining and innovative characteristic was the editing which produced stylised jumps in the action, which were incapable of performance by the actor, was not a dramatic work protected by copyright. A film per se cannot be a dramatic work within the meaning of the 1988 Act, though it can be a recording of such a work for the purpose of section 3(2).
	Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 1(1)(a)
	Link[s] omitted

O'Brien -v- Croydon London Borough Council
27 Jul 1998 QBD	Planning, Media
	A notice requiring discontinuance of an advertisement should be served on the company whose products were being advertised as the advertiser as well as the owner of the site. Failure to do so did not however vitiate prosecution where no prejudice was suffered.
	Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992 (1992 No 666)

Attorney-General -v- Birmingham Post and Mail Ltd [1998] EWHC Admin 769; [1999] 1 WLR 361; [1999] EMLR 39; [1998] 4 All ER 49
31 Aug 1998 QBD Simon Brown LJ, Thomas J	Contempt of Court, Criminal Practice, Media	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	The questions asked of a court when staying a criminal trial because of newspaper reporting, and when assessing a contempt of court, are different, and the stay of a trial need have no implication that a contempt has been committed. The strict liability rules did not help. Simon Brown LJ said: "It seems to me necessarily to follow . . that one and the same publication may well constitute a contempt and yet, even though not substantially mitigated in its effect by a temporary stay and/or change of venue, not so prejudice the trial as to undermine the safety of any subsequent conviction. To my mind that can only be because section 2(2) postulates a lesser degree of prejudice than is required to make good an appeal against conviction…In short section 2(2) is designed to avoid (and where necessary punish) publications even if they merely risk prejudicing proceedings, whereas a stay will generally only be granted where it is recognised that any subsequent conviction would otherwise be imperilled, and a conviction will only be set aside…if it is actually unsafe." As to the case of Unger, Simon Brown LJ said: "I still think that to create a seriously arguable ground of appeal is a sufficient basis for finding strict liability contempt. Clearly it is a relevant consideration too that when a judge at first instance is deciding whether or not to grant a temporary stay. But more particularly the trial judge will ask himself: "is there a real danger that the jury cannot reach a just verdict, or the defendant have a fair trial?" The judge will have to form a view as to just how seriously prejudicial the publication is, to what extent it can be mitigated by special directions, how desirable it is to avert a possible risk of a successful appeal on that ground, and how inconvenient and costly in the particular circumstances a stay would be (depending in large part no doubt on how far into the trial the problem arises)."
	Contempt of Court Act 1981 2(2)
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- Marylebone Magistrates Court and Another ex parte Amdrell Ltd T/S 'Get Stuffed' and Others
17 Sep 1998 QBD	Police, Media
	How the police execute a warrant must be an operational matter for them, but the involvement of media in press briefings and in attending the execution of warrants must be deplored as reducing the chances of a fair trial.

ex parte Guardian Newspapers Ltd [1998] EWCA Crim 2670; [1999] 1 WLR 2130
30 Sep 1998 CACD Brooke LJ	Criminal Practice, Crime, Media	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	The defendants purported to serve a notice under Rule 24A(1) of the Crown Court Rules 1982 of an intention to apply for a hearing in camera of their application that the trial be stopped as an abuse of process. Held: Where an application was to be made for a trial to be held in camera, an application to stay proceedings on the ground that the trial would be an abuse of process could itself be heard in camera. An order re 'all or part of a trial' included such application. It was said that the grounds for the judge's decision were mre wide ranging than had been revealed. The words in the rule 24A meant what they said: "A notice that the relevant party intends to apply for an order that the relevant part of the trial process … be held in camera for reasons of national security or for the protection of identity of a witness. This was not done. We appreciate that there may be rare cases where it might invalidate the very purpose of the application to specify which of the two grounds was being relied on and in such a case it would be proper for the party to use the language of the rule without being more specific."
	Crown Court Rules 1982 24A(1)
	[ Bailii ]

Regina -v- Manchester Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Granada Television Limited [1998] EWHC Admin 974
16 Oct 1998 Admn	Criminal Practice, Media	Casemap 1 Cites
	A Scottish search warrant was executable in England since it counted as a summary act under repealed legislation, though was also subject to the protection in England against searches of journalist's materials.
	Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- Central Criminal Court Ex Parte Simpkins; Regina -v- Same Ex Parte Plummer [1998] EWHC Admin 970
16 Oct 1998 Admn	Media, Criminal Practice, Children
	The test of whether an order should be made lifting the restriction on the naming of youths in criminal proceedings is whether there are good reasons for naming them. There is no requirement for 'rare and exceptional' qualification. Here no direct harm would be caused.
	Children and Young Persons Act 1933 39 44
	Link[s] omitted

Gaddafi -v- Telegraph Group Ltd [1998] EWCA Civ 1626; [1998] EWCA Civ 1626
28 Oct 1998 CA Lord Justice Stuart-Smith Lord Justice Hirst And Lord Justice Tuckey	Defamation, Media, Human Rights	Casemap 1 Cites
	The claimant, the son of the leader of Libya, sought damages for defamation from the defendant for an article alleging his involvement in criminal activities. The defendant appealed orders striking out certain parts of his defence, and the claimant appealed orders leaving other parts in place. Was there a qualified privilege for the articles because of the claimant's involvement in politics? The newspaper claimed that, when claiming privilege, it was proper to hide the identity of the sources of information upon which the claim was based. Held: A claim of qualified privilege required a social duty to publish, that those receiving the information had a proper interest in receiving it, and where the nature, status and source of the material, and the circumstances of the publication such as to justify a privilege. An order requiring disclosure of the sources would severely risk press freedom, and was not justified. Appeal and cross appeal s allowed in part.
	Contempt of Court Act 1981 10
	Link[s] omitted

In Re G (Minors) (Celebrities: Publicity) [1999] 1 FLR 409
4 Nov 1998 CA Thorpe LJ	Children, Media	Casemap 1 Citers
	Where extra publicity might attach to proceedings because of the celebrity of the parents, it was wrong to attach extra restrictions on reporting without proper cause. There remains a need to balance the need for the freedom of speech and the child's interests. That balance does not always fall one way. Thorpe LJ said that the court: "has jurisdiction in personam to restrain any act by a parent that if unrestrained would or might adversely affect the welfare of the child the subject of the proceedings." He spoke also of the need to give proper weight to freedom of speech: "As Hoffmann LJ rightly said in his judgment in R v Central Independent Television there is an inevitable tendency for the Family Division judge at first instance to give too much weight to welfare and too little weight to freedom of speech. That reality is reflected in the number of appeals in this field which succeed. Beyond that, as this case illustrates, all the advocates and the draftsmen before the court are equally child centred. Those who are to be bound by contra mundum orders have no opportunity to make submissions as to where the boundary should be drawn nor to contribute their expertise to the drafting. In my opinion consideration should be given to establishing a procedure to meet this deficit."
	Administration of Justice Act 1960 12

Regina -v- Independent Television Commission ex parte Flextech Plc and others and Sci-Fi Channel Europe Llc [1998] EWHC Admin 1050
6 Nov 1998 QBD Maurice Kay J	Media
	The ITC has the power to prevent agreements inconsistent with fair competition. It had been right to prevent the supply of channels only as part of bundled package with no a la carte choice. Minimum packages sold through retailers could be prohibited.
	Broadcasting Act 1990 2(2)
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- Secretary of State for Health and Social Security and Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ex parte Imperial Tobacco Limited [1998] EWHC Admin 1139; [1998] EWHC Admin 1140
16 Dec 1998 Admn	European, Media, Health
	Link[s] omitted