|
|
| |
Home >
UK & USA >
Arlidge, Eady & Smith on Contempt

|
Arlidge, Eady & Smith on Contempt
By
Sir David Eady, Tony Smith
The latest supplement brings the mainwork fully up to date with the latest case developments, including:
• Coverage of the important case of Mersey Care Trust v Ackroyd (No 2) [2007] HRLR 19. This illustrates that the “new methodology” expounded in Campbell v MGN Ltd of balancing Convention rights, without according automatic priority to one over another, is appropriate even in the context of applying s.10 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 to the protection of journalists’ sources.
• Looks at where those accused of contempt should wherever possible be given the opportunity of legal representation: Hammerton v Hammerton [2007] ECWA Civ 248 and G v G [2007] EWCA Civ 680.
• Coverage in chapters 7 and 8 about the need for open justice has been updated by reference to such cases as R (on the application of Malik) v Central Criminal Court [2006] 4 All ER 1141 and to the discussions, both on and off the bench, about increasing access to family courts for observers and commentators (e.g. in Norfolk County Council v Webster [2007] EMLR 199). The Court of Appeal has also had the opportunity to address the consequences for the media of s.82 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 relating to retrials following acquittals: Re D (Acquitted Person: Retrial) [2006] 1 WLR 1998.
• Looks at recent decision in Times Newspapers Ltd v R [2007] EWCA Crim 1925, which suggests there may be more scope to use s.11 of the 1981 Act to restrict reporting than had previously been thought, where information has slipped out in court by way of “mishap”.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|