Case Law: Brevan Howard v Reuters, Injunction granted against news agency in breach of confidentiality claim – Edmund Roper

21 04 2017

In Brevan Howard Asset Management LLP v Reuters Limited and others, [2017] EWHC 644 (QB) Popplewell J granted an application for an interim non-disclosure order preventing the publication or use by a news agency of information contained in documents supplied by Brevan Howard Asset Management LLP (“BHAM”) to 36 potential professional investors. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Flood v Times Newspapers, CFA appeals dismissed, future of the scheme left open – Aidan Wills

20 04 2017

On 11 April 2017 the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed three appeals brought by media organisations challenging the article 10 ECHR compliance of the recovery of additional liabilities (CFA success fees and ATE insurance premiums) from defendants in ‘publication cases.’ ([2017] UKSC 33). Read the rest of this entry »





The Supreme Court decision in Flood, Miller and Frost: a response to Keith Mathieson from a lawyer who acts for both claimants and defendants – Jonathan Coad

13 04 2017

In his piece on Inforrm yesterday, Keith Mathieson begins by describing the use of CFAs in cases against the media as a “scandal”. Evidently the Supreme Court did not agree with him – unanimously. One of the titles for whom he acts has already described judges with whom they disagree as “Enemies of the people”, so I suppose the judges can count themselves lucky not to have been attacked in similar terms. Read the rest of this entry »





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 »





Law and Media Round Up – 10 April 2017

10 04 2017

The Hilary legal term ends on Wednesday 12 April 2017.  The Easter Term begins on Tuesday 25 April 2017. Only one of the important outstanding reserved judgments in media law case is due to be delivered before the end of term: Flood v Times Newspapers. Read the rest of this entry »





Transparency Project: Family Court Reporting Watch – Weekly Round-Up No. 21

9 04 2017

The purpose of this update is to correct, clarify and comment on media reports of family court cases, to explain and comment on published Judgments of family cases and to highlight other transparency news. Read the rest of this entry »