header-logo header-logo

Broadcasting—Freedom of expression—Access to prisoners

19 January 2012
Issue: 7497 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of British Broadcasting Corporation and another) v Secretary of State for Justice [2012] EWHC 13 (Admin), [2012] All ER (D) 29 (Jan)

 

Queen’s Bench Division, Divisional Court, Hooper LJ and Singh J, 11 Jan 2012
 
A decision of the secretary of state for justice to refuse the BBC permission to conduct and broadcast a face-to-face interview with a prisoner was a disproportionate interference with the right of freedom of expression guaranteed by Art 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Lord Pannick QC and Tim Cleaver (instructed by BBC legal department) for the claimants. James Eadie QC and Martin Chamberlain (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the secretary of state.

The claimants, the BBC and one of its home affairs correspondents, applied for permission to conduct a face-to-face interview with a prisoner. The claimants also wished to broadcast the filmed product of that interview. The prisoner had been held without charge in the UK and his extradition had been sought by the US
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll