The Attorney-General sought to restrain the publication of a book which she said would prejudice the defendants in a forthcoming criminal trial. The publisher said that a restraint would be a disproportionate interference in its Article 10 rights.
Held: The court considered the proper reluctance to restrain an anticipated contempt of court.
Judges:
Tugendhat J
Citations:
[2009] EWHC 1727 (QB), [2010] EMLR 9
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 10, Contempt of Court Act 1981 2(2)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 3) CA 1992
To found a complaint of contempt the risk arising from the publication must be practical rather than theoretical or illusory. Publicity concerning a named defendant before a jury during the jury trial of another charge did not give rise to a serious . .
Cited – Leary v Britiah Broadcasting Corporatin CA 29-Sep-1989
Lord Donaldson MR considered an application for an injunction to prevent a publication which it was said would create a contempt of court, and said: ‘I am very concerned that no one should think that on a speculative basis you can go to the courts . .
Cited – Attorney General v MGN Limited CA 1997
There had been, over some years, ‘saturation coverage’ of the relationship between a television personality and her boyfriend. Disclosures were made about his violence and his previous convictions. He came to be arrested and charged with a serious . .
Cited – Attorney-General v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 1986
When considering a complaint of contempt of court against a newspaper, it should be recognised that any criminal trial, by its very nature, causes all involved in it to become progressively more inward looking, with the capacity to study the . .
Cited – Attorney-General v English HL 1981
The risk of impediment or prejudice to a trial from a publication has to be assessed at the date of publication. ‘Substantial risk’ in section 2(2) means a risk which is more than remote. Lord Diplock said: ‘Next for consideration is the . .
Cited – Attorney General v Independent Television News and Others CA 1995
Leggatt LJ said that counsel for the Attorney General was correct when he submitted that: ‘It does not follow that because a risk had been created by the broadcast, further publication in newspapers would not create fresh and added risk of . .
Cited – Attorney General v MGN Limited CA 1997
There had been, over some years, ‘saturation coverage’ of the relationship between a television personality and her boyfriend. Disclosures were made about his violence and his previous convictions. He came to be arrested and charged with a serious . .
Cited – Attorney-General v British Broadcasting Corporation; Same v Hat Trick Productions Ltd CA 11-Jun-1996
The mention of a case on a television programme remained a contempt of court, despite the humorous context given to the remarks in the broadcast.
Auld LJ said: ‘The degree of risk of impact of a publication on a trial and the extent of that . .
Cited by:
Cited – HM Attorney General v MGN Ltd and Another Admn 29-Jul-2011
The police arrested a man on suspicion of the murder of a young woman. He was later released and exonerated, and a second man arrested and later convicted. Whilst the first was in custody the two defendant newspapers, the Daily Mirror and the Sun . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Media, Contempt of Court, Human Rights
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.376265