‘Tougher penalties may be needed to deal with Twitter and Facebook users who are “deliberately naming and abusing” rape victims online, a legal adviser to the Crown Prosecution Service has said.’
The Guardian, 9th July 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘High court rejects move by hedge fund tycoon Christopher Hohn to prevent media from publishing details from hearings.’
The Guardian, 7th July 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Two high profile sex cases in recent days have thrown open the debate about parity in law of anonymity for both victims and defendants.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 3rd July 2014
Source: www.halsburylawexchange.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal is to rule on whether a trial of two terrorist suspects can be heard in secret.’
BBC News, 12th June 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A tribunal conducting asylum proceedings could admit, as expert evidence, a report by an organisation based on a telephone interview with an asylum claimant in which its analysts commented on the likelihood of that person originating from his claimed place of origin, based on the person’s dialect and answers to questions about the area in question, even though the report was in the name of the organisation rather than an individual and those contributing to it were identified only by serial numbers. However it was necessary for the tribunal in each particular case to be satisfied that the anonymity was necessary, with safeguards for the claimant in place, and that the authors of the report had demonstrated that they had relevant expertise for each matter on which they had commented.’
WLR Daily, 21st May 2014
‘Somali man convicted of manslaughter defeats bid to remove him from Britain, despite being single man with no children.’
Daily Telegraph, 12th May 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
A (Respondent) v British Broadcasting Corporation (Appellant) (Scotland) [2014] UKSC 25 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 8th May 2014
‘This appeal related to whether the Scottish Courts took the correct approach to prohibit the publication of a name or other matter in connection with court proceedings under section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, and whether the court’s discretion was properly exercised in this case. The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal by the BBC.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 9th May 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Any order made by any court under section 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 prohibiting the identification of (among others) a defendant under the age of 18 years could not extend to reports of the proceedings after the subject of the order had reached the age of majority at 18.’
WLR Daily, 8th April 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘How can a society balance both the freedom of expression, including the freedom of the press, with the individual’s right to reputation? Defamation law seeks to address precisely this delicate equation. Especially in the age of the internet, where it is possible to publish immediately and anonymously, these concerns have become even more pressing and complex. The Defamation Act 2013 has introduced some of the most important changes to this area in recent times, including the defence for honest opinion, new internet-specific reforms protecting internet publishers, and attempts to curb an industry of “libel tourism” in the U.K.’
OUP Blog, 14th April 2014
Source: www.blog.oup.com
‘This case raises the question whether an order made under s. 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 … prohibiting the identification of (among others) a defendant under the age of 18 years, can last indefinitely or whether it automatically expires when that person attains the age of 18 years. It has wide implications not only for young defendants but also for victims, witnesses, others concerned in proceedings and, of course, the media. [Sir Brian Leveson P, giving the judgment of the court , opening the case at para 1].’
UK Human Rights Blog, 9th April 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A woman who tweeted the identity of the alleged victim in the trial of Coronation Street’s Michael Le Vell has been fined.’
BBC News, 20th 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A handyman who took hundreds of thousands of pounds from a wealthy widow with dementia after gaining power of attorney must not be named, a court rules.’
Daily Telegraph, 17th March 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘In the second part of her article reviewing reporting restriction orders and the new transparency Mary Lazarus, barrister of 42 Bedford Row, considers those cases involving aggrieved parties and cases with international implications.’
Family Law Week, 4th March 2014
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘A judge has lifted an order banning the naming of an 18-year-old man charged with terror offences.’
BBC News, 3rd March 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘An 89-year-old woman who suffers from dementia and says she is “miserable” in a care home has won the first stage in a court fight to live in her own home. A Court of Protection judge has ruled Manuela Sykes can return to her flat where she has lived for 60 years on a one-month trial basis.’
BBC News, 25th February 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A woman has been ordered to stop an online “campaign” against a court’s decision to take her two-year-old granddaughter into care.’
The Independent, 28th January 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Home Office is caught up in a row over its refusal to name terror suspects who have gone missing while on control orders.’
Daily Telegraph, 25th January 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘New guidance on transparency in proceedings has been published by the President of the Family Division and of the Court of Protection, Sir James Munby.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 23rd January 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘Police and MI5 will put “tailored plans” in place to manage the risks posed by terror suspects when existing supervision measures expire later this month, the Home Office has insisted.’
The Guardian, 18th January 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025