The defendant was convicted of importing pornographic films and magazines. One ground of appeal was that the proceedings were a nullity because the press and public had been excluded from the court room during the showing of the films.
Held: The appeal failed. The principle of open justice does not extend to a right for members of the public in court, to inspect documents or other exhibits placed before the court.
Lawton LJ said: ‘When evidence is given orally, all in court hear what is said. When evidence is produced it may or may not be read out . . The members of the public in court have no right to claim to be allowed to look at the exhibits.’ and ‘As judges have differed as to how judicial discretion should be exercised in this class of case it may be helpful if we give some guidance . . It seems to us that, normally when a film is being shown to a jury and the judge, in the exercise of his discretion, decides that it should be done in a closed court room or in a cinema, he should allow representatives of the press to be present. No harm can be done by doing so: some good may result.’
Judges:
Lawton LJ
Citations:
[1975] 1 WLR 711
Cited by:
Cited – Guardian News and Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court and Another CA 25-Oct-2011
The claimant newspaper sought to appeal against a refusal by the respondent to disclose papers filed in a case before it. The court considered whether it had jurisdiction to hear an appeal.
Held: Under the 1981 Act no appeal would lie if the . .
Cited – Guardian News and Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court CA 3-Apr-2012
The newspaper applied for leave to access documents referred to but not released during the course of extradition proceedings in open court.
Held: The application was to be allowed. Though extradition proceedings were not governed by the Civil . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.450438