‘Plans to broadcast HBO’s Church of Scientology exposé, Going Clear, have been shelved by Sky Atlantic in a virtual repeat of events two years ago, when UK publishers abandoned publication of the book on which the hard-hitting new TV documentary is based.’
The Guardian, 18th April 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Ambulance-chasing law firms are using the European Court’s ruling on the “right to be forgotten” to drum up business, leading to a rise in the number of newspaper articles being deleted from Google search results.’
The Independent, 17th April 2015
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Matters covered by someone who ‘blows the whistle’ on suspected bad practices at their employer need not necessarily be “of interest to the public” to benefit from stricter rules governing whistleblower protection, the UK’s Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has said.’
OUT-LAW.com, 13th April 2015
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Department of Health v. Information Commissioner et al [2015] UKUT 159, 30 March 2015, Charles J read judgment Simon Lewis requested that the Department of Health supply him with copies of the ministerial diary of Andrew Lansley from May 2010 until April 2011, via a Freedom of Information request. Mr Lewis’s interest in all this is not revealed in the judgment, but I dare say included seeing whether the Minister was being lobbied by private companies eager to muscle in on the NHS in this critical period. But such is the nature of FOIA litigation that it does not really look at the motive of the requester – and this case does not tell us what the diary showed. Indeed by the time of this appeal, Lewis was untraceable, and the burden of the argument in favour of disclosure was taken up by the Information Commissioner.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 10th April 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘On Friday, 27th March, the Supreme Court handed down a decision which will be as much of interest to public lawyers as information rights practitioners alike. Evans, a journalist for the Guardian newspaper utilised the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 to seek the disclosure of letters sent by Prince Charles to seven government departments between September 2004 and March 2005. The departments refused to disclose the letters (so-called “black spider” memos on account of the Prince’s handwriting) on the basis that they were exempt from doing so. In their view the letters represented private correspondence which effectively allowed the Prince to prepare for “kingship.” Evans subsequently complained to the Information Commissioner who upheld the refusal before appealing to the Information Tribunal. The Tribunal held that many of the letters should be disclosed as they constituted “advocacy correspondence.”’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 31st March 2015
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘An ex-News of the World reporter who was found guilty of paying a prison officer for information has had their conviction quashed.’
BBC News, 27th March 2015
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A woman who “trolled” Madeleine McCann’s family on Twitter killed herself days after she was challenged by reporters, an inquest concluded.’
BBC News, 20th March 2015
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Yet another jury has cleared more Sun journalists who were charged with offences related to the paying of public officials.’
The Guardian, 20th March 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘A “mole” at the Ministry of Defence who made £100,000 from leaking stories to the Sun has been jailed for 12 months, it can now be reported after verdicts were delivered in a related trial.’
The Guardian, 20th March 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘In February 2012 Drs Sivaraman and Rajmohan were the subject of an undercover operation organised by The Daily Telegraph at various abortion clinics in England. The evidence obtained was passed to the police and, after an investigation, considered by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). It was concluded that in each case there was sufficient evidence of an abortion offence, although this was a finely balanced decision, but that it was not in the public interest to prosecute. On 5 September 2013 and, in more detail, on 7 October 2013 the CPS issued public statements explaining the decision making in these cases.’
CPS News Brief, 13th March 2015
Source: http://blog.cps.gov.uk
‘Prosecutors halt case against doctors filmed in Telegraph investigation over ‘public interest’ considerations.’
Daily Telegraph, 13th March 2015
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘In the particular circumstances of the case limited disclosures made by a Revenue and Customs official in an “off the record” briefing with journalists concerning tax avoidance schemes had been made “for the purposes” of a function of the Revenue and Customs, within section 18(2)(a)(i). Therefore there had been no breach of article 18(1) of the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005, which required the commissioners to maintain confidentiality of information about a taxpayer’s affairs.’
WLR Daily, 4th March 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘An officer at a Serco-run immigration centre justified leaking stories to The Sun by claiming the firm turned a blind eye to corruption, a court has heard.’
BBC News, 25th February 2015
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The High Court has dismissed a challenge to the land acquisition order that will allow Tottenham Hotspur Football Club (THFC) to complete the redevelopment of the site of its north London stadium, according to reports.’
Full story
OUT-LAW.com, 23rd February 2015
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Courtesy of Hansen Palomares Solicitors comes news of this settled Judicial Review of LB Southwark’s gatekeeping practices on homeless applications. It appears, to put it mildly, that Southwark have had a range of what should have been obviously unlawful policies on homeless applications, and even put them into leaflets and their website.’
NearlyLegal, 22nd February 2015
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
‘HSBC’s Swiss arm is potentially open to a range of criminal charges in Britain because there is “credible evidence” that it has had a role in enabling tax evasion, according to a former director of public prosecutions.’
The Guardian, 22nd February 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘It is no matter of Euclidian geometry to say that where x + y = z, and z = 13, being told what y equals one need not be Pythagoras to establish the value of x. But what happens when z is in the public domain, x is absolutely exempt information under FOIA (because it is caught by section 23(1)) and the public interest otherwise favours the disclosure of y, which is not the subject of an exemption? Inevitably, the effect of disclosure is that the absolutely exempt information is also revealed. The Interim Decision of the Upper Tribunal in Home Office v ICO & Cobain [2014] UKUT 306 (AAC) was that the Tribunal had to consider whether it was appropriate to utilise the section 50(4) FOIA power so as not to direct disclosure. The issue may be formulaic, but the answer is not.’
Panopticon, 6th February 2015
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘The Crown Prosecution Service has announced it is to take no further action against an unnamed Sun journalist and a public official who were investigated over tips for stories.’
The Guardian, 4th February 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘A ruling that prevented the deportation of a Somali man who raped a pregnant woman has been successfully challenged by the home secretary.’
BBC News, 5th February 2015
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025