The court granted an injunction to restrain the media from interviewing witnesses during the course of a criminal trial, and until all the evidence was complete. One witness would have to be recalled, and others might be recalled, and accordingly held that the proposed interviews would constitute a contempt of court pursuant to ss.1 and 2 of the 1981 Act.
Aikens J said: ‘Of course the power of the Crown Court to grant injunctions is strictly limited to the specific matters that are set out in section 45(4). There is no general power in the Crown Court to grant injunctions. But I am satisfied that the Crown Court has the power to grant an injunction to restrain a threatened contempt of court in relation to a matter that is before the Crown Court in question.’
Aikens J
[2002] EMLR 11, [2002] EMLR 184
Supreme Court Act 198145(4), Contempt of Court Act 1981 1 2
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd QBD 2-Oct-2009
The defendant had published a story in its newspaper. At that time it attracted Reynolds qualified privilege. After the circumstances changed, the paper offered an updating item. That offer was rejected as inadequate.
Held: The qualified . .
Cited – Regina v Croydon Crown Court ex parte Trinity Mirror Plc; In re Trinity Mirror plc CACD 1-Feb-2008
An order had been made protecting the identity of a defendant who pleaded guilty to possessing indecent images of children. The order was made in the interests of his own children, although they had been neither witnesses in the proceedings against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Media, Criminal Practice
Updated: 04 December 2021; Ref: scu.377203
