Skip to main content

Contempt


11.05.22

Depp v Heard: the perils of life-streaming and trial by TikTok

Following on from recent blogs on derogations from the principles of open justice and closed materials, we look today at the other side of that coin: wide-open justice.  At the time of writing, the US defamation case of John C. Depp II v Amber Laura Heard (CL-2019-2911) is just past its half-way point in Fairfax,…

Read more

27.04.22

Sex offender’s attempt to hold law firm to ransom over data breach backfires

In Chief Constable of Kent Police & Anor v Taylor [2022] EWHC 737 (QB), Mr Justice Saini considered a claim for breach of confidence, arising from the Defendant’s refusal to delete videos that a law firm that had accidentally disclosed to him and which contained sensitive information about a vulnerable minor.  The videos were taken…

Read more

26.04.22

Closed judgments and national security

In this blog we examine the decisions in The Queen on the application of Privacy International v Investigatory Powers Tribunal [2022] EWHC 770 QB and Her Majesty’s Attorney General for England and Wales v British Broadcasting Corporation [2022] EWHC 826 (QB), and the topic of closed judgments.  Neither judgment fully explains the reasoning behind their…

Read more

24.03.22

Anonymisation in civil proceedings

There has long been a tension between the principles of open justice and the desire of parties litigating sensitive matters to keep their identity, parts of the litigation, or even the fact of the litigation itself, private. The default position for almost all civil litigation is that (i) parties are named in proceedings, (ii) non-parties…

Read more

22.11.21

Should litigants in person get less leeway in libel cases?

The question of how much leeway a litigant-in-person should get when it comes to compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules (‘CPR’) and court orders is a long-argued and fraught one.  The concept of litigants-in-person being treated in the same way as those professionally represented has been eroded over time with concessions here and indulgences there….

Read more

21.10.21

Brett Wilson LLP and its lawyers recommended in Chambers and Partners 2022 directory

Brett Wilson LLP’s media and communications law and criminal defence departments have again been recommended by the prestigious Chambers and Partners directory. In the firm’s media and communications law department, partners Iain Wilson (noted for ‘having very good knowledge and understanding what a client wants), Max Campbell (‘outstanding knowledge, practical approach and amazing client service‘) and…

Read more

4.10.21

Brett Wilson LLP’s departments and lawyers recognised by Legal 500

Brett Wilson LLP has again been recommended in three categories in the prestigious Legal 500 directory of leading law firms:- Reputation Management Professional Discipline Crime (General) Media and communications law partners Iain Wilson (described as ‘superb’) and Max Campbell (noted for his ‘brilliant judgement and [standing] out among solicitors in this area for his strategic approach’) have been…

Read more

30.06.21

Adham Harker joins Brett Wilson LLP’s Media and Communications Law team

Adham Harker has joined Brett Wilson LLP’s Media and Communications Law team. Adham has advised and acted in a range of media, IP and commercial disputes from pre-action to trial, with extensive experience of Business & Property Court litigation. For Adham’s full biography, please click here.

Read more

23.11.20

Brett Wilson LLP’s offices open for face-to-face consultations

Brett Wilson LLP’s London offices have reopened for face-to-face consultations.  Clients who would prefer to have a Skype, Teams or telephone consultation continue to have this option. The safety of clients and staff is of paramount importance.  The firm has a rigorous Covid-19 protocol, approved by the British Safety Council.  All staff and visitors are…

Read more

Should the Supreme Court be less supreme?

The Telegraph has reported that Ministers are understood to be discussing plans to change the name of the Supreme Court, cut the number of permanent judges, and bring in new judges with “specialist” knowledge to hear individual cases.  The government has been considering reform since last year when the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Boris…

Read more

Legal Disclaimer

Articles are intended as an introduction to the topic and do not constitute legal advice.

Cookies are used to personalise this website for you and to analyse how the website is being used. You give us your permission to do this by clicking the “agree” button or by continuing to use the website having received this notification. You can find further information on cookies in our cookie policy.