All posts
4.02.22
In defence of privacy and the judiciary: the fall-out from HRH the Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd
Brett Wilson LLP partner Iain Wilson tries to unpick some of the misreporting following the Court of Appeal’s decision in HRH the Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1810 Here we are again. The press doesn’t like us having private lives and the government doesn’t like judges making decisions it disagrees…
Read more14.07.21
Legal regulators clamp down on keyboard warriors
Legal professionals, like virtually everyone else, have been spending much more time at home recently. On the whole the industry has adapted well, but it has led to very large numbers of lawyers (who are typically quite articulate, often opinionated types) sitting alone at home for long spells, often scrolling through the daily news in…
Read more8.07.21
Wagatha Christie: Court rules on strike out and summary judgment application
Background The ‘Wagatha Christie litigation’, as it is affectionately known, is the fascinating case of mistrust between friends and a sting operation to find a leak. Colleen Rooney (wife of footballer Wayne) became concerned that ‘stories’ she was publishing to her private Instagram account – to which only her actual friends had access – were…
Read more23.06.20
High Court sets very high bar for harassment by publication claims against the press
In Sube & Anor v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor (Rev 1) [2020] EWHC 1125 (QB) the High Court emphatically rejected a claim for harassment against media organisations. The case highlights the difficulties faced by claimants in harassment proceedings against media organisations, as it must be found that the conduct by the media organisation…
Read more2.06.20
High Court strikes out parts of HRH The Duchess of Sussex’s claim against The Mail on Sunday
In HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2020] EWHC 1058 (Ch), the High Court struck out parts of the Duchess’ claim against Associated Newspapers Limited (‘ANL’), the publisher of The Mail on Sunday and operator of the MailOnline website. Background The Duchess’ claim is for misuse of private information, breach of the…
Read more23.01.20
Defamation Act 2013: A summary and overview six years on
The Defamation Act 2013 (‘the Act’) came into force on 1 January 2014. At the time, we published an article considering the individual provisions of the Act, and speculating about how the law of defamation had been changed. In this follow-up article, we revisit the topic six years after the Act’s inception and look at…
Read more20.08.19
New rules for media and communications claims
From 1 October 2019 new rules – in the form of a revised Part 53 of the Civil Procedure Rules, revised/new practice directions (PD 7A, 53A and 53B) and an all encompassing pre-action protocol – will apply to claims in England and Wales arising from media and communications disputes. The formal designation of a specialist…
Read more19.06.19
Supreme Court confirms defamation is no longer actionable per se
In Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd & Anor [2019] UKSC 27 the Supreme Court sought to clarify the meaning of section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013. The Supreme Court was unequivocal in its rejection of the Court of Appeal’s interpretation of section 1(1) and its endorsement of Mr Justice Warby’s analysis of the law…
Read more16.05.19
Paparazzi agencies pay damages to Duke of Sussex for privacy invasion
Splash News and Picture Agency Limited and Splash News & Picture Agency LLC (‘Splash’) have apologised and agreed to pay substantial damages to the Duke of Sussex after using a helicopter to take photographs of his home in the Cotswolds. In January of this year Splash chartered a helicopter which flow over the Duke’s home…
Read more9.04.19
Supreme Court considers social media defamation: context is everything
Some practitioners were surprised that Stocker v Stocker [2019] UKSC 17 reached the country’s highest court. The appeal concerned the meaning (or imputation) of words in a libel action. At first blush this apparently factual dispute might not have seemed to be a matter of any particular public importance, taking into account the Supreme Court’s busy workload and…
Read moreLegal Disclaimer
Articles are intended as an introduction to the topic and do not constitute legal advice.
