Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Media - From: 1997 To: 1997

This page lists 29 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.

 
M v British Broadcasting Corporation [1997] 1 FLR 51
1997
FD
Hale J
Media, Child Support
The applicant's child had been fathered by donor insemination. He sought to prevent the defendant publicising his forthcoming case with the Child Support Agency in which he intended to deny a responsibility to provide child support. Held: An injunction was refused. The case was really about the protection of M's reputation, and his desire not to publicise his infertility, and not that of any child. The public interest in the freedom of the press must prevail.
Administration of Justice Act 1960 12
1 Citers


 
Barrymore v News Group Newspapers Limited [1997] FSR 600
1997
ChD
Jacob J
Media, Information
The newspaper defendant sought to publish information about features of an intimate homosexual relationship. The plaintiff sought to prevent it. Held: The injunction was granted.
Jacob J said: "The fact is that when people kiss and later one of them tells, that second person is almost certainly breaking a confidential arrangement."
The court drew a distinction between the disclosure of the existence of a sexual relationship which might not amount to a breach of confidence and the publication of details about what one party of the relationship said to the other about the first party’s other relationships in particular marital relationship, which crossed the line to a breach of confidence.
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Attorney General v MGN Limited; CA 1997 - [1997] 1 All ER 456; [1997] EMLR 284
 
Vodafone Group Plc v Orange Personal Communications Services Ltd [1997] FSR 34; [1997] EMLR 84
1997
ChD
Jacob J
Intellectual Property, Media, Defamation
The court examined the development of the law in relation to comparative advertising. Jacob J said: "Prior to the coming into force of the Trade Marks Act 1994 comparative advertising using a registered trade mark of a competitor was, subject to minor exceptions involving the use of a company name, forbidden by section 4(1) of the Trade Marks Act 1938. But in an increasingly pro-competitive environment there was virtually a moratorium on enforcement of section 4(1) rights in a number of trades - for instance comparative advertising in the field of motor cars was very common for a number of years before the 1938 Act was repealed. The 1994 Act now positively permits fair competitive advertising by section 10(6). This provides:
"Nothing in the preceding provisions of this section shall be construed as preventing the use of a registered trade mark by any person for the purpose of identifying goods or services as those of the proprietor or a licensee.
But any such use otherwise than in accordance with honest practices in industrial or commercial matters shall be treated as infringing the registered trade mark if the use without due cause takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or repute of the trade mark."
In this case it is common ground that there is no infringement unless the use of Vodaphone in the comparison falls within the qualification of section 10(6). This qualification was considered by Laddie J in Barclays Bank Plc v. Advanta [1996] RPC 307. He held that it is for the plaintiff to show that the use falls within the qualification and that the test of honesty is objective (ie. would a reasonable reader be likely to say, upon being given the full facts, that the advertisement is not honest?). Laddie J gave as an example the case where the advertisement is "significantly misleading". In trade marks, as [Counsel] rightly submitted, there is no "one meaning rule". If a comparison is significantly misleading on an objective basis to a substantial proportion of the reasonable audience, it is not an "honest practice" within the section."
"The meaning of the words concerned is the first matter to be considered, for their truth or falsity is to be tested against that meaning. The meaning is for the court to determine when a judge sits without a jury. Evidence of the meaning to others is inadmissible. The question: ‘is not one of construction in the legal sense. The ordinary man does not live in an ivory tower and he is not inhibited by the rules of construction. So he can and does read between the lines in the light of his general knowledge and experience of worldly affairs . . What the ordinary man would infer without special knowledge has generally been called the natural and ordinary meaning of the words. But that expression is rather misleading in that it conceals the fact that there are two elements in it. Sometimes it is not necessary to go beyond the words themselves, as where the plaintiff has been called a thief or a murderer. But more often the sting is not so much in the words themselves as in what the ordinary man will infer from them, and that is also regarded as part of their natural and ordinary meaning’, per Lord Reid in Lewis v The Daily Telegraph"
Jacob J discussed obiter the application of the 'one meaning rule' in malicious falsehood cases: "As a comparative stranger to this branch of the law I find the "one meaning rule" strange, particularly for malicious falsehood. Without authority, I should have thought it would be enough to satisfy the criterion of falsity for the plaintiff to prove that the defendant made a statement which was false to a substantial number of people. That, for instance, is the position in passing off (a tort also concerned with false representations): for that tort it is enough to show that the representation fools some of the people, even if not most of them.
The reason for the libel rule in part relates to the entitlement of jury trial for libel (as Diplock L.J. explained in Slim). Save in exceptional circumstances the right to jury trial remains for libel and slander (see section 69(1) of the Supreme Court Act 1981) but there is no such right in relation to malicious falsehood. So it by no means follows that that historical reason for the rule in libel should apply to malicious falsehood. Another reason for the rule relates to the function of a jury in awarding damages for defamation: unless one has settled on a particular meaning one cannot judge the extent of the defamation. But in malicious falsehood damages are rather different: they are essentially compensatory for pecuniary loss as for most other torts. So again it does not seem necessarily to follow that the libel rule should apply to the tort. However, as I say, the parties were agreed that I should proceed on the basis that I am a notional jury identifying the single meaning of the words complained of. That is what I will do, and, as will be seen, in this case the point is academic."
Jacob J looked at the question of meaning in marketing cases: "This is a case about advertising. The public are used to the ways of advertisers and expect a certain amount of hyperbole. In particular the public are used to advertisers claiming the good points of a product and ignoring others, . . and the public are reasonably used to comparisons— "knocking copy" as it is called in the advertising world. This is important in considering what the ordinary meaning may be. The test is whether a reasonable man would take the claim being made as one made seriously, the more precise the claim the more it is likely to be so taken— the more general or fuzzy the less so."
Trade Marks Act 1994 10(6) - Supreme Court Act 1981 69(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Bennett and others v Guardian Newspapers Limited Times, 27 February 1997; [1997] EWCA Civ 815
22 Jan 1997
CA

Defamation, Media
The existence of other rumours as to a plaintiff's character do not reduce the damages to be awarded for the distress caused by the libel in a libel action.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
De Haes and Gijsels v Belgium (1997) 25 EHRR 1; 19983/92; [1997] ECHR 7
24 Feb 1997
ECHR

Human Rights, Media
The court emphasised that the press plays an essential role in a democratic society. The court trenchantly observed "It is incumbent on the press to impart information and ideas of public interest. Not only does the press have the task of imparting such information and ideas: the public also has a right to receive them." It is central to the concept of a fair trial whether civil or criminal, that a litigant should not be denied the opportunity to present his case, and should enjoy equality of arms. Equality of arms is a procedural aspect: it seeks to ensure that the defendant does not suffer an unfair procedural disadvantage.
European Convention on Human Rights 810
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v British Broadcasting Corporation ex parte Pro-Life Alliance Party; Admn 24-Mar-1997 - [1997] EWHC Admin 316
 
Regina v British Broadcasting Corporation, ex parte Referendum Party; Regina v Independent Television Commission, ex parte Referendum Party [1997] EWHC Admin 406
24 Apr 1997
Admn
Lord Justice Auld and Mr Justice Popplewell
Media, Elections
The Referendum Party challenged the allocation to it of less time for election broadcasts. Under the existing agreements, having fielded over 50 candidates, they were allocated only five minutes. Held: Neither the inclusion of past electoral support as part of their general criteria for allocating party election broadcasts nor their treatment of the lack of it in this case was irrational. Both the BBC and ITV companies were under a duty to act with due impartiality. The application was dismissed.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Newspaper Publishing Plc and Others [1997] EWCA Crim 987; [1997] 1 WLR 926; [1997] 3 All ER 159
25 Apr 1997
CACD
Lord Bingham of Cornhill LCJ, Latham, PooleJJ
Crime, Contempt of Court, Media

[ Bailii ]

 
 Attorney-General v Newspaper Publishing Plc and Others; CA 2-May-1997 - Times, 02 May 1997; [1998] Ch 333; [1997] 1 WLR 927

 
 Criminal proceedings against Denuit; ECJ 29-May-1997 - C-14/96; [1997] EUECJ C-14/96
 
MGN Limited v Northamptonshire County Council [1997] EWHC Admin 536
9 Jun 1997
Admn

Consumer, Media, Crime

Consumer Protection Act 1987 20(1)
[ Bailii ]
 
Criminal Proceedings Against Denuit Times, 23 June 1997
23 Jun 1997
ECJ

Media
Member may not criminalize retransmission of TV broadcasts on ground only that they infringe 'TV without frontiers' directive in programming.

 
Attorney General v Michael Ronald Unger; Manchester Evening News Limited and Associated Newspapers Limited [1997] EWHC Admin 624; [1998] 1 Cr AR 308
3 Jul 1997
Admn
Simon Brown LJ, Garland J
Contempt of Court, Media
Complaint was made that the defendant newspapers had caused a serious prejudice to a trial by articles published before the trial of the defendant in criminal proceedings. The defendant pleaded guilty to theft at the magistrates' court after she had been interviewed by a newspaper, which published her statement that she would not be denying the charges. The contempt allegations were on the basis that at the date of publication there was a real chance that the defendant might have elected trial by jury, in which case there was a substantial risk that her trial would be seriously prejudiced, and second, at the invitation of the court, that the publication could have impacted on the defendant in such a way that she might see no point in seeking to deny the allegation which otherwise she might have contested. In the context of potential prejudice, Simon Brown LJ recorded his concern that the courts should not speak: "with two voices, one used to dismiss criminal appeals with the Court roundly rejecting any suggestion that prejudice resulted from media publications, the other holding comparable publications to be in contempt, the Courts on these occasions expressing grave doubts as to the jury's ability to forget or put aside what they had heard or read. I am certainly not saying that in respect of one and the same publication there cannot be both a contempt . . and a safe conviction. Plainly there can, most obviously perhaps in cases where the trial has had to be moved or delayed to minimise the prejudice occasioned by some publication. But generally speaking it seems to me that unless a publication materially affects the course of the trial in that kind of way, or requires directions from the court well beyond those ordinarily required and routinely given to juries to focus their attention on evidence called before them…, or creates at the very least a seriously arguable ground for an appeal on the basis of prejudice, it is unlikely to be vulnerable to contempt proceedings under the strict liability rule."
Contempt of Court Act 1981 2(2)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 In Re A v B, Ex Parte News Group Newspapers Ltd; EAT 4-Jul-1997 - Times, 04 July 1997
 
James Morford; James Morford Limited; Paul Bowling; Hanslope Limited v Nic Rigby and East Anglian Daily Times [1997] EWCA Civ 2035
7 Jul 1997
CA

Media

[ Bailii ]

 
 Phonographic Performance Ltd v AEI Rediffusion Music Ltd; ChD 14-Jul-1997 - Times, 14 July 1997; Gazette, 23 July 1997
 
Camelot Group Plc v Centaur Communications Plc Times, 15 July 1997; [1999] QB 124
15 Jul 1997
QBD

Human Rights, Employment, Media
Human rights law is no aid in protecting a journalist against an order requiring the return of confidential documents, even though this might identify the source of leak.
Contempt of Court Act 1981
1 Citers



 
 MGN Ltd v Ritters; QBD 30-Jul-1997 - Times, 30 July 1997
 
Regina v Advertising Standards Authority Limited ex parte Direct Line Financial Services Limited [1997] EWHC Admin 770
8 Aug 1997
Admn

Media

[ Bailii ]
 
Barker v Statesman and Nation Publishing Company Limited; Campbell; British Broadcasting Corporation; Professor Pinching and Dr Helbert [1997] EWCA Civ 2314
27 Aug 1997
CA

Media

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v British Broadcasting Corporation ex parte Bruno Febo Quintavelle (PPC for the Prolife Alliance) [1997] EWCA Civ 2531
20 Oct 1997
CA
The Master of The Rolls, Lord Woolf, Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Chadwick
Elections, Media, Judicial Review
The applicant stood for Parliament, but the respondent had refused to show his party election broadcast on the grounds of its lack of taste and decency. He had sought to demonstrate the evils of abortion, and now renewed his application for leave to bring judicial review of the decision. Held: It was not arguable that the respondent's decision was perverse, and the election having passed, no further virtue was to be served by conducting a full review. Each such decision would be on its own merits.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Camelot Group plcv Centaur Communications Limited Gazette, 12 November 1997; Times, 30 October 1997; [1997] EWCA Civ 2554; [1999] QB 124
23 Oct 1997
CA
Lord Justice Schiemann, Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Mummery
Contempt of Court, Employment, Media, Human Rights
An order for a journalist to disclose the name of an employee disclosing his employer's information, may be made where there was a need to identify a disloyal employee. Here drafts of accounts had been released to embarrass the company. The documents involved were stolen, and a return of them would enable identification of the source of them. Could the section protect the source? A balancing exercise was required, one which would differ from case to case. Here it weighed in favour of disclosure. In this case there remained a threat of further damage from a disloyal senior employee.
Contempt of Court Act 1981 10 - European Convention on Human Rights Art 10
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
BBC Scotland, McDonald, Rodgers and Donald v United Kingdom Unreported, 23 October 1997; 34324/96
23 Oct 1997
ECHR

Human Rights, Media
The court accepted the compatibility with article 10 of restrictions on the publication of material which may prejudice the outcome of court proceedings
European Convention on Human Rights 10
1 Citers



 
 Zana v Turkey; ECHR 25-Nov-1997 - 18954/91; [1997] ECHR 94; [2011] ECHR 2394
 
Simm's Application for Judicial Review; O'Brien's Application for Judicial Review and Main's Application for Judicial Review [1997] EWCA Civ 2913; [1998] 2 All ER 491
4 Dec 1997
CA
Kennedy, Judge, Chadwick LJJ
Prisons, Media
In two cases, long term prisoners who asserted their innocence were in touch with journalists. Challenges were made against conditions imposed on their access that materials obtained during the visits should not be disclosed by the journalists. A third prisoner challenged the inspection of correspondence with his solicitor. The prison governors' now appealed against rulings in the favor of the prisoners as to th validity of the Prison Service Standing Orders.
Prison Rules 1964 33(1)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]

 
 Holley, SD and R Trading Limited, Henry Ansbacher and Co Limited, Ansbacher (Jersey) Limited v Smith; CA 4-Dec-1997 - Times, 20 December 1997; Gazette, 14 January 1998; [1997] EWCA Civ 2914; [1998] QB 726; [1998] 1 All ER 853
 
Attorney-General v Blake Times, 22 December 1997; Gazette, 28 January 1998; [1997] EWCA Civ 3008; [1998] Ch 439
16 Dec 1997
CA
Lord Woolf M.R., Millett and Mummery L.JJ
Administrative, Media, Employment
A former member of the security services, convicted for spying, had written a book. The AG appealed a refusal to prevent publication. The court upheld denied the appeal on the breach of fiduciary claim. The Attorney General amended his statement of claim and advanced a public law claim to asserted, not a private law right on behalf of the Crown, but a claim for relief in his capacity as guardian of the public interest. Held: In this latter capacity the Attorney General may, exceptionally, invoke the assistance of the civil law in aid of the criminal law. The jurisdiction of the civil courts was not limited to an injunction restraining the commission or repeated commission of an offence. If a criminal offence has already been committed, the jurisdiction extends to enforcing public policy with respect to the consequences of the commission of that crime, e.g. restraining receipt by the criminal of a further benefit as a result of or in connection with that crime. This was an exceptional case in which the Attorney General could intervene by civil proceedings, in aid of the criminal law, to uphold the public policy of ensuring that a criminal does not retain profit directly derived from the commission of his crime. The court made an order that the defendant be restrained from receiving any payment resulting from the exploitation of the book in any form or any information therein relating to security and intelligence which is or has been in his possession by virtue of his position as a member of the Secret Intelligence Service.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Brentwood Borough Council Ex Parte Peck Times, 18 December 1997; [1997] EWHC Admin 1041
18 Dec 1997
Admn
Harrison J
Intellectual Property, Judicial Review, Local Government, Media
The claimant sought judicial review of the authority's distribution to the media of a CCTV film of his attempted suicide. Held: A Local Authority which was empowered to make video recording of street events had a power to distribute resulting film being unaware of objection.
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 111
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.