Limitation on Making of Anonymity Orders A firm of solicitors sought an order for anonymity in their proceedings against the LAB, saying that being named would damage their interests irrespective of the outcome. Held: The legal professions have no special part in the law as a party to entitle a court to allow a solicitors … Continue reading Regina v Legal Aid Board ex parte Kaim Todner (a Firm of Solicitors): CA 10 Jun 1998
The claimant resisted removal after failure of his claim for asylum, saying that this would have serious adverse consequences to his mental health, infringing his rights under article 8. He appealed the respondent’s certificate that his claim was manifestly unfounded. Held: Mental health was part of the respect for private life protected by article 8. … Continue reading Regina v Sectretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Razgar etc: HL 17 Jun 2004
The respondent operated a web site which contained a chat room. Defamatory remarks were made by a third party through the chat room, and the claimant sought details of the identity of the poster. The respondent refused to do so without a court order. One was applied for, and the claimant was given the information … Continue reading Totalise Plc v The Motley Fool Limited and Interative Investor Limited (2): CA 19 Dec 2001
Wrongful Transmission of Distanced Hearing In a defamation case, the solicitors representing one party had live streamed a video of a defamation trial to several individuals outside the jurisdiction without the Court’s permission. The trial took place during the Coronavirus pandemic, and conducted at a distance. There had been discussions between the judge and solicitors … Continue reading Gubarev and Another v Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd and Another: QBD 6 Aug 2020
Contempt sentence to reflect existing punishment The wife appealed against a sentence of imprisonment imposed for a second contempt of court. She said that the behaviour complained of had already been dealt with in criminal proceedings. Held: The sentence was reduced. The second court should be fully informed of the factors and circumstances reflected in … Continue reading Slade v Slade: CA 17 Jul 2009
The Fellowship had applied for orders upgrading public rights of way. The council rejected the applications saying that the digital mapping software used to repare the maps submitted were not compliant with the requirements of the legislation. They . .
In a case where a contemnor not only fails wilfully and contumaciously to comply with an order of the court but makes it clear that he will continue to defy the court’s authority if the order should be affirmed on appeal, the court must have a . .
A court asked to sentence for contempt of court is not sentencing for the criminal equivalent of what the contemnor has done, and ‘Great care must be taken, if there are concurrent criminal or civil proceedings, to ensure that sentences in two or . .
When sentencing for harassment, the court must look to previous failures to obey court orders, the defendant’s mental health, and his readiness to undergo treatment, as well as the seriousness of the conduct constituting the harassment. ‘For a . .
The respondent had been sentenced to two months imprisonment for breaches of orders under the Act. The wife appealed, seeking to increase the sentence. The maximum sentence was two years.
Held: The court had to consider such cases in the light . .
An English court had power to make a restraining order against the disposal of assets pending an application for confiscation pursuant to a US order. This applied even if the US original judgment predated the date on which the US was added to the . .
The court system has acknowledged that the movement toward wider and wider publication of case law (of which we form part) has potential conflicts with privacy in general, and GDPR and Human Rights in particular. There have therefore been developed much more explicit systems for applying to court for ‘anonymity orders’ – an order that … Continue reading Anonymity Orders
A web site operator who declined responsibility for the moderation of a chat room on the site, but did take steps to remove a poster making defamatory remarks, could not rely upon the Act to resist disclosure of the identity of the author. The Act . .
Although the plain words of the Act would not allow an appeal to the Court of Appeal under the circumstances presently applying, it was clear that the parliamentary draftsman had failed to achieve what he had wanted to, that the omission was in . .
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 . .
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
The court was asked whether disclosure should be ordered in the context of the statutory privilege which was created by s.10 of the 1981 Act. The publisher defendant had deposed that it would justify the material. At trial, however, the defence of . .
References: [2001] 2 SCR 344, 200 DLR (4th) 577, 155 CCC (3d) 97, 2001 SCC 42 Links: Vcanlii Coram: Arbour J (Supreme Court of Canada) The court considered the reason behind the common law rule against a court examining the activities of a jury: ‘the rule seeks to preserve the secrecy of the jury’s deliberations, … Continue reading Regina v Pan; 29 Jun 2001
