HER MAJESTY'S ATTORNEY GENERAL for ENGLAND and WALES v BRITISH BROADCASTING CORPORATION

HER MAJESTY'S ATTORNEY GENERAL for ENGLAND and WALES v BRITISH BROADCASTING CORPORATION

The Attorney General is more likely than not to succeed at trial in establishing that the balance of public and private interests favours granting an injunction prohibiting the BBC from disclosing X's name and image. Disclosure would expose X to a real and immediate risk of death or serious injury, require extensive protective measures, and materially damage national security. Public disclosure would not materially reduce the risk X poses to women due to the protective measures that would be implemented. The relief is a significant but justified interference with freedom of expression, as the BBC can still report the core elements of the story without identifying X.

Parties
Claimant: Her Majesty's Attorney General for England and Wales; Defendant: British Broadcasting Corporation; Special Advocate: Special Advocates
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interim Injunction Application
Outcome
interim injunction granted
Legal Topics
Interim Injunction, Freedom of Expression, Breach of Confidence, National Security, Journalistic Material, ECHR Articles 2, 3, 8, 10, Closed Material Procedure
Media Law Confidentiality Human Rights National Security Interim Injunction Freedom of Expression Breach of Confidence Journalistic Material +2 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 6 Authorities cited 43 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Attorney General for England and Wales

Claimant

British Broadcasting Corporation

Defendant

Special Advocates

Special Advocate

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interim Injunction Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim injunction should be granted to restrain the BBC from publishing the identity of X as a CHIS for MI5
  2. 2 Whether the balance of public and private interests favours non-disclosure of X's identity
  3. 3 Whether disclosure would cause real and immediate risk to X's life or safety

Ratio Decidendi

The Attorney General is more likely than not to succeed at trial in establishing that the balance of public and private interests favours granting an injunction prohibiting the BBC from disclosing X's name and image. Disclosure would expose X to a real and immediate risk of death or serious injury, require extensive protective measures, and materially damage national security. Public disclosure would not materially reduce the risk X poses to women due to the protective measures that would be implemented. The relief is a significant but justified interference with freedom of expression, as the BBC can still report the core elements of the story without identifying X.

Court Disposition

interim injunction granted

Orders

  • The BBC is prohibited from publishing X's name and image, and any secondary information tending to identify X, pending trial.
  • The precise terms of the injunction to be determined after further directions to identify prohibited information.