US Freedom of Expression and Media Law Round Up – 30 April 2011

30 04 2011

It has been more than two months since we last rounded up the US Freedom of Expression and Media Law news.  Apologies to our readers, in the US in particular, for the delay and for the cases and stories we have missed.

The most high profile First Amendment decision of the year so far was Snyder v Phelps (2 March, 2011). The case Read the rest of this entry »





News: Mosley v United Kingdom, judgment to be given on 10 May

29 04 2011

The Court of Human Rights will give judgment in the case of Mosley v United Kingdom on Tuesday 10 May 2011.  The application was heard on Tuesday 11 January 2011.  The central question was whether the United Kingdom had a positive obligation under Article 8 of the Convention to protect Mr Mosley’s privacy by providing for a legal duty on the News of the World to warn him in advance of publication in order to allow him to seek an injunction. Read the rest of this entry »





How the media told the phone hacking story, Part 2 – Judith Townend

29 04 2011

News International’s PR team must be thrilled that the super injunction has pushed phone hacking out of the national headlines.  More than one media commentator has suggested that the newspapers – and not just Murdoch’s – are happy to divert attention away from that particular scandal.

In part one, I examined the number of newspaper stories about phone hacking at Read the rest of this entry »





Privacy – the way ahead? Part 2 – Background to the New Law – Hugh Tomlinson QC

28 04 2011

The Prime Minister said last week that he was “uneasy” about the development of a privacy law by judges based on the European Convention when this should be a matter for parliament.  In our contribution to the continuing debate on this issue we are re-posting an updated version of  this series from last year on the way ahead for privacy law.   Part 1 looked at the outline of the new law.  This part considers the historical background.

Introduction

The “new law of privacy” has not been uncontroversial.  Over the past week the press has complained bitterly about “gagging orders” and “judge made law”.  These criticisms are not new.  Read the rest of this entry »





Privacy law: the super-injunction is dead

27 04 2011

“Super-injunctions” are in the news.   The “Committee to examine super-injunctions” established by the Master of the Rolls in April 2010 is due to report shortly.  There have been nearly 200 newspaper stories referring to “super-injunctions” in the past week alone.   The latest concerns Andrew Marr “revealing” that he obtained a super-injunction. Commentators are united in their criticism of the practice of granting super-injunctions.   There are many strange features of the “super-injunction” story but perhaps the strangest of all is the fact that they no longer exist.   Read the rest of this entry »





“Privacy law – the way ahead?” Part 1 – The New Law of Privacy – Hugh Tomlinson QC

26 04 2011

The Prime Minister has said that he is “uneasy” about the development of a privacy law by judges based on the European Convention when this should be a matter for parliament.  In our contribution to the continuing debate on this issue we are re-posting an updated version of  this series of posts from last year on the way ahead for privacy law.

Introduction

The “law of privacy” has been developed by the English Courts over the past decade. It is a common law development based on case law going back to the mid nineteenth century. Read the rest of this entry »





Law and Media Round Up – 25 April 2011

25 04 2011

In this regular feature we draw attention to the last week’s law and media news and next week’s upcoming events. If readers have any news or events which they would like to draw attention to please add them by way of comments on this post.

News

The weeks media and law news has been dominated by “privacy gag madness”.   The press have fulminated against privacy injunctions – without actually suggesting that any of them have been wrongly granted.  No public interest in the publication of stories about the sex lives of celebrities has been suggested.  Read the rest of this entry »





“Privacy Madness: rational debate disappears in a tide of self interest and obsession with sex” – Mark Thomson

25 04 2011

The British Press is prone to periodic bouts of uncontrollable rage.  It turns, from time to time, on a particular target and vents its fury.   When these episodes take place, all pretence of “balance” or “argument” is left behind.   Last week was the week of “privacy madness”.

The familiar rant against “amoral judges” and “shameless celebrities” has been spiced up with a touch of populist feminism:  those obtaining these injunctions and “gagging” the British press are, apparently, all “rich males”.   Although this particular social sub-group is not normally subject to unfavourable comment in the “Mail”, “Times” and “Telegraph” some of its members have committed the unforgivable sin of trying to cut the tabloids off from their essential sources of reader titillation. Read the rest of this entry »





News: Solicitors from Hell – another injunction, judge urges professions to take action

24 04 2011

In a judgment given on 30 March 2011 in the case of Robins v Kordowski [2011] EWHC 981 (QB)) Mr Justice Henriques granted yet another interim injunction against Mr Rick Kordowski, the proprietor of the “Solicitors from Hell” website to prevent the continued publication of defamatory allegations against a solicitor.  The injunction was also granted against the individual who had posted the material in question, Tim Smee – who had been the opposing party in litigation in which the claimant, Mr Stephen Robins, had acted.  In the course of his judgment the judge urged the lawyers’ professional bodies to take action against the notorious website. Read the rest of this entry »





Opinion: “Gagging on Privacy” – Adam Wagner

24 04 2011

When the prime minister criticises judges, he tends to speak from his gut. The prospect of prisoners being given the vote by European judges makes him feel “physically sick”. And now, he is “a little uneasy” about the rise of “a sort of privacy law without Parliament saying so“.

David Cameron’s use of visceral language may reflect what many in the general public (as well as PR man Max Clifford) are feeling Read the rest of this entry »








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,748 other followers