Interbrew v Financial Times & Ors [2001] EWHC 480 (Ch) (19 December 2001)

Interbrew v Financial Times & Ors [2001] EWHC 480 (Ch) (19 December 2001)

In exceptional circumstances where a source has manipulated the press to commit a serious market-related wrongdoing, and where the claimant has sufficiently explored other avenues, the public and private interest in identifying the source overrides the presumption of journalistic source protection. The requirements of Section 10 Contempt of Court Act 1981 are met, and the court should order delivery up of the documents to assist in identifying the wrongdoer.

Citation
[2001] EWHC 480 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Interbrew SA; First Defendant: Financial Times Limited; Second Defendant: Independent Newspapers (UK) Limited; Third Defendant: Guardian Newspapers Limited; Fourth Defendant: Times Newspapers Limited; Fifth Defendant: Reuters Group PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application (civil) / Application for Mandatory Interlocutory Relief
Outcome
Claimant's application for delivery up of documents granted under Norwich Pharmacal relief; refused on breach of confidence.
Legal Topics
Breach of Confidence, Norwich Pharmacal Relief, Press Privilege, Disclosure of Journalistic Sources, Freedom of Expression, Market Manipulation
Media Law Equity Civil Procedure Breach of Confidence Norwich Pharmacal Relief Press Privilege Disclosure of Journalistic Sources Freedom of Expression +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Interbrew SA

Claimant

Financial Times Limited

First Defendant

Independent Newspapers (UK) Limited

Second Defendant

Guardian Newspapers Limited

Third Defendant

Times Newspapers Limited

Fourth Defendant

Reuters Group PLC

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application (civil) / Application for Mandatory Interlocutory Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to mandatory interlocutory relief for delivery up of documents from media defendants to identify the source of a leak
  2. 2 Whether the public and private interest in identifying the source overrides the journalistic source protection under Article 10 ECHR and Section 10 Contempt of Court Act 1981

Ratio Decidendi

In exceptional circumstances where a source has manipulated the press to commit a serious market-related wrongdoing, and where the claimant has sufficiently explored other avenues, the public and private interest in identifying the source overrides the presumption of journalistic source protection. The requirements of Section 10 Contempt of Court Act 1981 are met, and the court should order delivery up of the documents to assist in identifying the wrongdoer.

Court Disposition

Claimant's application for delivery up of documents granted under Norwich Pharmacal relief; refused on breach of confidence.

Orders

  • Defendants who received doctored copies from the source must deliver up the documents to the claimant for use in tracing the source.
  • The Independent must deliver up its copy if it is not merely a copy of another defendant's document; otherwise, certification by a solicitor suffices.