Cases: Media Law

AG v Guardian (No 2) (Spycatcher) & Sunday Times v UK

 Facts: A spy had written a book of his memories about being a spy. There was some opposition to the publication of what might be national security issues. Court of Human Rights took the strict line on this case. Court imposed an injunction banning the publication. Held: Any limitation must be prescribed by law and…

Read Case Study

British Chiropractic Association v Singh [2010] EWCA Civ 350

Facts: It is not always easy to distinguish from fact or opinion. In this case, the court had to analyse whether criticism of lack of evidence for treatment was fact or opinion.  Held: Facts can be viewed as opinion from conclusion. We need context to determine fact or opinion.  

Butt v Secretary of State [2019] EWCA Civ 933

Facts: Government press release suggested doctor Butt was a hate speaker and extremist. The press release was designed to tell people on public counter terrorism. Held: An ordinary and reasonable reader would recognise him as ‘hate speaker and extremist’ and would identify him with words such as ‘poisonous and pernicious’. A reasonable reader would claim…

Read Case Study

Charleston v News Group Newspapers Ltd [1995] 2 AC 65

Facts: 2 characters of the ‘Neighbours’ show were on the front page of a newspaper. The headline suggested that they had posed for pornographic photos but in reality, the heads were composed on model’s photos. Held: Not defamatory Readers would have read the body of the texts if they were a reasonable person.

Creams Holdings Limited v Banerjee

Facts: 12 means that an interim injunction will only be granted if the claimant is likely to succeed at trial. In Cream, the court looked at what was meant by “likely to succeed at trial.”   Held: The court said that it meant looking at whether there was a realistic chance. No amount of damages…

Read Case Study