header-logo header-logo

07 June 2012
Issue: 7517 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Freedom of speech

Trimingham v Associated Newspapers Limited [2012] EWHC 1296 (QB), [2012] All ER (D) 248 (May)

It was established law that for the court to comply with its obligations under s 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998, it had to hold that a course of conduct in the form of journalistic speech was reasonable under s 1(3)(c) of the 1998 Act unless, in the particular circumstances of the case, the course of conduct was so unreasonable that it was necessary and proportionate to prohibit or sanction the speech in pursuit of one of the aims listed in Art 10(2) of the Convention, including, in particular, for the protection of the rights of others under Art 8 of the Convention. The test required the publisher to consider whether a proposed series of articles, which was likely to cause distress to an individual, would constitute an abuse of the freedom of the press which the pressing social needs of a democratic society required should be curbed. In considering the effect of a course of conduct which consisted of

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

Freeths—Heather Gibson

Freeths—Heather Gibson

Freeths strengthens national tax team with Heather Gibson appointment

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise expands London secondaries team with addition of Mary Lavelle

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law welcomes ex-Irwin Mitchell team to launch Hestia Private Client

NEWS
Lawyers have welcomed plans to create specialist rape and serious sex offences courtrooms at every Crown Court
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
back-to-top-scroll