The Attorney General sought the committal for contempt of the respondents who were said to have published details which might identify two notorious convicted criminals wose identties were protected by injunction. Both defendants indicated that they knew of the prohibition.
Held: ‘We must also take into account the very serious nature of publication on a social media or otherwise on the internet. We have already set out the potential – and in fact in one case the actuality – of the very widespread use of the information that was placed by them onto the internet. The social media can reach very many people, as this case shows. Therefore the conduct of anyone who publishes such information – whether it be on the social media or elsewhere on the internet – has that very serious consequence. ‘ Orders of imprisonment were made, but each was suspended for the personal mitigations of the defendans.
Sir John Thomas P, Tugendhat J
[2013] EWHC 1455 (Admin), [2013] All ER (D) 215 (Apr)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Jones, Re (Alleged Contempt of Court) FD 21-Aug-2013
The Solicitor General sought the committal of the respondent for alleged contempt of court. There had been repeated litigation between the respondent and her former husband as to whether the children should live in Spain with the father or in Wales . .
Cited – Re Yaxley-Lennon (Aka Tommy Robinson) CACD 1-Aug-2018
Need for clarity in Contempt Allegation
The defendant appealed from his convictions for contempt of court, being said to have broadcast details of criminal prosecutions despite orders to the contrary. He argued that any failure of procedure was fatal to the prosecutions.
Held: As to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contempt of Court
Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.510191