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: 1900 To: 1929
This page lists 6 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Rex v Tibbits and Windust [1902] 1 KB 77
1902
Lord Alverstone CJ
Crime, Media
The editor published articles prepared by a reporter, affecting the conduct and character of some persons under trial. Both the editor and the reporter were charged with unlawfully attempting to pervert the course of justice. Held: Lord Alverstone CJ said: "We further think that, if the articles are in the opinion of the jury calculated to interfere with the course of justice or pervert the minds of the magistrate or of the jurors, the persons publishing are criminally responsible: See Reg v Grant. We are also of opinion that the fact that Allport and Chappell, the persons referred to, were subsequently convicted can have no weight in the decision of the question now before us. To give effect to such a consideration would involve the consequence that the fact of a conviction, though resulting, either wholly or in part, from the influence upon the minds of the jurors at the trial of such articles as these, justifies their publication. This is an argument which we need scarcely say reduces the position almost to an absurdity, and, indeed, its chief foundation would appear to be a confusion between the course of justice and the result arrived at."
1 Citers
De La Bere v Pearson Ltd [1904-7] All ER Rep 755; [1908] 1 KB 280
1908
Vaughan Williams LJ, Barnes P
Negligence, Media
The defendant newspaper offered that its editor would give financial advice to readers who cared to seek it. He answered one enquiry for the name of a good stockbroker, with a reference to a person who, had he made enquiries, he would have discovered to be an undischarged bankrupt, and the plaintiff sought damages having reied upon the advice. Held: There was sufficient consideration in the plaintiff consenting to the publication of his letter in the newspaper (Vaughan Williams). The consideration lay in the plaintiff addressing the inquiry (Barnes P)
1 Citers
Scott v Scott; HL 5-May-1913 - [1912] P 241; [1913] AC 417; 29 TLR 520; [1911-13] All ER 1; [1913] UKHL 2
Sports and General Press Agency v "Our Dogs" Publishing Co [1917] KB 125 CA
1917
CA
Intellectual Property, Media
The plaintiff had sold to the Press photographic rights to a dog show. An independent photographer took pictures and sold them to the defendant, who published them. The plaintiff sought to restrain further publication. Held: An injunction was refused on the ground that the dog show organisers and the plaintiff could, by contract, have laid down, but had failed to lay down, conditions of entry or as to banning the use of unauthorised cameras.
1 Citers
Abraham v United States (1919) 250 US 616
1919
Holmes J
Media, International
(US Supreme Court) Holmes J (dissenting): "the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market."
1 Citers
Whitney v California (1927) 274 US 357
1927
Brandeis J
International, Media
(United States) Brandeis J considered that the risk of mis-reporting of court proceedings was in fact a reason for more court reporting: "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."
1 Citers
