Media Law: 8 General reporting restrictions Flashcards Preview

Media Law > Media Law: 8 General reporting restrictions > Flashcards

Flashcards in Media Law: 8 General reporting restrictions Deck (24):
1

orders restricting reporting under CCA 1981
[2]

- s4(2) order (temporary)
- s11 order (permanent)

2

where can orders be used?
[3]

- any criminal or civil court
- coroner's court
- some (but not all) tribunals

3

s4(2) orders (general details)
[3]

- POSTPONE reporting on whole/part of proceedings
- must be substantial risk of prejudice
- can be applied for started, pending or innocent proceedings

4

circumstances in which s4(2) orders almost always used
[3]

- proceedings not in front of jury
- when material risks prejudicing other imminent/pending cases
- defendant acquitted, but court predict a new trial

5

Marvin Dawkins (2004)
[3]

- Romeo from So Solid Crew
- wanted reporting postponed due to female fan harassment
- court overturned s11, didn't order s4(2)

6

R v Burrell (2004)
[4]

- Burrell accused of raping civil servant
- complainant wanted publication post-poned because her co-workers knew the case
- s4(2) NOT granted
- complainant became ill, verdict reached NOT GUILTY

7

teenagers attacking boy with hammer (2008)
[3]

- Swindon Advertiser reported day-by-day first trial
- s4(2) during jury deliberation extended to second trial
- press argued this was pointless because jury were told first verdict in second trial

8

MGN Pension Trustees Ltd v Bank of America National Trust and Saving Association and Credit Suisse (1995)
[2]

- pension funds of Robert Maxwell companies
- decided risk of prejudice NOT severe enough

9

David Chick (2004)
[2]

- Fathers4Justice 'spiderman'
- ruled that it didn't matter if jury remembered news reportage, hearing details in court would remind them too

10

Re Bardot (2006)
[3]

- Dhiren Bardot accused of failed London bombings
- lawyers argued publicity would ruin upcoming cases of other similar clients
- s4(2) order overturned

11

where/when can't s4(2) orders be used?
[2]

- when case isn't active/pending/imminent (usually someone must be charged)
- outside the courts

12

how long are s4(2) orders
[3]

- usually to end of trial / other affected trials
- court has power to extend
- JSB guidelines (2009) said shouldn't be indefinite

13

previous cases considering public interest
[2]

- Plymouth Evening Herald cocaine ring story (2006)
- police officer chasing press photographer (2007)

14

limits of s4(2) orders
[3]

- material not admitted into evidence
- material not prejudicial to proceedings
- material already in public domain

15

when will s11 orders be invalid
[1]

- when there is no previous legal provision to implement them
- if details already disclosed in open court

16

exception to open court rule
[2]

- when info disclosed accidentally
- Bush/Blair letter (2007)

17

what is ban not there to protect?
[3]

- embarrassment
- professional reputation
- defendant's children

18

exceptions to these rules
[4]

- witnesses unlikely to give evidence if not anonymous
- victims unlikely to come forward if identified
- very vulnerable people with potential of mental harm
- giving medical evidence of personal nature

19

what most important legislation is considered regarding anonymity?
[1]

- Article 2 of HRA (right to life)

20

giving notice of s4(2) and s11 orders
[3]

- info put in writing (purpose, what it covers, when it ceases)
- press should be notified
- court staff should be willing to answer queries

21

challenging s11 orders
[2]

- court should allow press representations where possible
- when urgent, make temporary orders then invite press for representations

22

finding out whether an order is in place
[2]

- should be posted in court complex
- if not posted, still press's responsibility to find out

23

anonymity orders
[5]

- ordered in High Court
- can order in injunction when 'convenient to do so'
- carries on to Court of Appeal and Supreme Court (unless they specifically lift them)
- increasingly used by parties claiming privacy (Art 8 HRA) affected
- 2010 Supreme Court ruled against over use

24

High Court's powers
[6]

- known as 'inherent jurisdiction'
- used when person's welfare/interests could be damaged if named
- can ban actual gathering of news on case
- applies to both adults and children (wards or not)
- can extend to County Courts
- Appeal and Supreme have similar powers