HM Attorney General v MGN Ltd [2009] EWHC 1645 (Admin) (23 June 2009)

HM Attorney General v MGN Ltd [2009] EWHC 1645 (Admin) (23 June 2009)

The publication in the Yorkshire edition of the Daily Mirror created a real risk of serious prejudice to the administration of justice in the pending trial of Mustaf Jama, constituting a serious contempt under the strict liability rule. Although the breach resulted from a single failure in an otherwise satisfactory system and did not cause irreparable harm, the nature of the article and the context warranted a substantial penalty. A fine of £25,000 and indemnity costs were appropriate to reflect the seriousness and to deter future breaches.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 1645 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Her Majesty's Attorney General; Defendant: MGN Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 June 2009
Procedural Posture
Contempt of Court Proceedings / Sanction/penalty Determination After Admission of Contempt
Outcome
Defendant found in contempt of court; penalty imposed.
Legal Topics
Strict Liability Rule, Prejudicial Publication, Reporting Restrictions, Mitigation in Contempt, Sanctions for Contempt
Criminal Law Media Law Contempt of Court Strict Liability Rule Prejudicial Publication Reporting Restrictions Mitigation in Contempt Sanctions for Contempt

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 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Attorney General

Claimant

MGN Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contempt of Court Proceedings / Sanction/penalty Determination After Admission of Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether publication of the article constituted contempt of court under the strict liability rule of the Contempt of Court Act 1981
  2. 2 What is the appropriate sanction for the admitted contempt

Ratio Decidendi

The publication in the Yorkshire edition of the Daily Mirror created a real risk of serious prejudice to the administration of justice in the pending trial of Mustaf Jama, constituting a serious contempt under the strict liability rule. Although the breach resulted from a single failure in an otherwise satisfactory system and did not cause irreparable harm, the nature of the article and the context warranted a substantial penalty. A fine of £25,000 and indemnity costs were appropriate to reflect the seriousness and to deter future breaches.

Court Disposition

Defendant found in contempt of court; penalty imposed.

Orders

  • MGN Ltd to pay a fine of £25,000.
  • MGN Ltd to pay the Attorney General's reasonable costs on an indemnity basis.