Greater Manchester Police v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 739 (22 March 2005)

Greater Manchester Police v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 739 (22 March 2005)

The evidence did not establish to the requisite high standard that the broadcast would create a substantial risk of serious prejudice to the administration of justice beyond the risk already present due to existing notoriety and publicity; therefore, the injunction should not have been granted.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 739
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police; Defendant/appellant: Channel 5 Broadcast Limited; Victim: Desmond Noonan (deceased); Interested Party: Mr P Havers QC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Against Interim Injunction
Outcome
Appeal allowed; injunction quashed; costs awarded to appellant
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Interim Injunctions, Freedom of Expression, Witness Intimidation
Media Law Criminal Law Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Interim Injunctions Freedom of Expression Witness Intimidation

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police

Claimant/respondent

Channel 5 Broadcast Limited

Defendant/appellant

Desmond Noonan (deceased)

Victim

Mr P Havers QC

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Against Interim Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether broadcasting a programme about the Noonan family would create a substantial risk of serious prejudice to the administration of justice under section 2(2) of the Contempt of Court Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether the high threshold for granting an injunction restraining publication was met

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence did not establish to the requisite high standard that the broadcast would create a substantial risk of serious prejudice to the administration of justice beyond the risk already present due to existing notoriety and publicity; therefore, the injunction should not have been granted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; injunction quashed; costs awarded to appellant

Orders

  • Order of Poole J restraining broadcast quashed
  • Respondent to pay appellant's costs, subject to detailed assessment