header-logo header-logo

Practice

12 June 2015
Issue: 7656 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

OPO (A Child by BHM his litigation friend) v MLA and another [2014] EWHC 2468 (QB), [2015] All ER (D) 23 (Jun)

The claimant, through his mother as litigation friend applied for an injunction to restrain the first defendant father and the second defendant publisher from publishing a book about the first defendant’s experiences of being sexually abused as a child and his subsequent battles with mental illness. The Queen’s Bench Division dismissed the application on the basis, amongst others, that under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, a claim by a child seeking to restrain his father from talking about his (the father’s) life largely before the child was born was misconceived.

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—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll