Filter cases by:
Barrister
- Desmond Browne CBE KC
- Justin Rushbrooke KC
- Adrienne Page KC
- Andrew Caldecott KC
- Tom Blackburn SC
- Alexandra Marzec
- David Sherborne
- Jonathan Barnes KC
- Godwin Busuttil
- Adam Wolanski KC
- William Bennett KC
- Christina Michalos KC
- Jacob Dean KC
- Adam Speker KC
- Richard Munden
- David Hirst
- Victoria Simon-Shore
- Victoria Jolliffe
- Felicity McMahon
- Chloe Strong
- Gervase de Wilde
- Julian Santos
- Greg Callus
- John Stables
- Ben Hamer
- Patrick Milmo KC
- Professor Tony Smith
- Patrick McCafferty QC
Iqbal v Geo TV Limited
(1) Joseph Pacini, (2) Carsten Geyer v Dow Jones & Company Inc [2024] EWHC 2714 (KB)
Hawrami v Journalism Development Network Inc & Ors
Libel – Preliminary Issues Trial – meaning – qualified privilege – s. 15 Defamation Act 1996
Vince v Associated Newspapers Ltd
Libel – strike out – meaning – the rule in Charleston
Ryland v Channel Four Television Corporation [2024] UKFTT 603
The Appellant made a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for information about advertising and sponsorship revenue received by Channel 4 from Sainsbury’s. The Information Commissioner upheld Channel Four’s refusal to provide the information on the basis that it was held for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and therefore not held in Channel Four’s capacity as a public authority under the Act (i.e. that the so-called “derogation” applied). On appeal, the Appellant argued that he was seeking only aggregated information, not the “building blocks” consisting of specific figures for specific programme sponsorships etc, and that there was insufficient connection between that aggregated information and the purposes of journalism etc to engage the derogation. The First-tier Tribunal disagreed, holding that it was necessary to consider whether the “building blocks” were pieces of information held for the purposes of journalism etc. Having heard detailed evidence about how modern TV advertising works, the Tribunal accepted Channel Four’s case and upheld the Information Commissioner’s Decision Notice.
Secretary of State for Business and Trade v Alexander Greensill
Open justice – Article 8 – Pre-hearing access to witness statements – Non-parties
Harcombe v Associated Newspapers Ltd
Defamation - preliminary issues - trial of public interest defence under s.4 Defamation Act 2013 - Curistan - reporting privilege under s.15 Defamation Act 1996 - privilege for publication of a summary of a peer-reviewed scientific article under s.6(5) Defamation Act 2013 - meaning - fact or opinion - honest opinion - not believing an opinion under s.3(5) Defamation Act 2013
Mueen-Uddin v SSHD
Libel – Hunter abuse – Jameel abuse – Rule in Dingle
George v Cannell
Malicious falsehood - proper interpretation of s.3, Defamation Act 1952 - whether s.3 requires a claimant to prove actual pecuniary damage or only its likelihood at the time of publication - whether damages for injury to feelings are recoverable if pecuniary damage sustained is only nominal
Various Claimants v NGN (TPI)
TPI - Phone Hacking Litigation - Limitation
Clifford v Millicom Services UK Ltd & Ors
Reporting Restriction Orders – Rule 50 – Article 8 ECHR – Whistleblowing – Confidentiality
WFZ v British Broadcasting Corporation
Blake and ors v Fox
Libel – serious harm – social media – causation – qualified privilege