Harwood, R. v - [2012] EW Misc 27 (CC) (20 July 2012)

Harwood, R. v - [2012] EW Misc 27 (CC) (20 July 2012)

The continued online availability of two Mail Online articles containing inadmissible allegations against the defendant constituted a substantial risk of serious prejudice to the ongoing trial, amounting to contempt of court under the strict liability rule. The articles were 'published' for the purposes of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 as they remained readily accessible online. The risk to the fairness of the trial justified the grant of a proportionate injunction requiring their removal for the duration of the proceedings.

Citation
[2012] EW Misc 27 (CC)
Parties
Prosecution: Crown (Regina); Defendant: PC Simon Harwood; Interested Party/publisher: Associated Newspapers Limited (Mail Online)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial (contempt of Court Proceedings Ancillary to Manslaughter Trial) / Post Trial Ruling on Contempt and Injunctive Relief
Outcome
Injunction granted; contempt of court found in respect of the two articles.
Legal Topics
Strict Liability Contempt, Publication on the Internet, Jury Prejudice, Injunctions, Freedom of Expression, Publisher Liability, Online Archives
Criminal Law Media Law Contempt of Court Strict Liability Contempt Publication on the Internet Jury Prejudice Injunctions Freedom of Expression +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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crown (Regina)

Prosecution

PC Simon Harwood

Defendant

Associated Newspapers Limited (Mail Online)

Interested Party/publisher

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial (contempt of Court Proceedings Ancillary to Manslaughter Trial) / Post Trial Ruling on Contempt and Injunctive Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether continued online publication of prejudicial material constitutes contempt of court under the strict liability rule
  2. 2 Whether archived online articles are 'published' for the purposes of the Contempt of Court Act 1981
  3. 3 Whether the risk of jury prejudice justifies injunctive relief against media publishers

Ratio Decidendi

The continued online availability of two Mail Online articles containing inadmissible allegations against the defendant constituted a substantial risk of serious prejudice to the ongoing trial, amounting to contempt of court under the strict liability rule. The articles were 'published' for the purposes of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 as they remained readily accessible online. The risk to the fairness of the trial justified the grant of a proportionate injunction requiring their removal for the duration of the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Injunction granted; contempt of court found in respect of the two articles.

Orders

  • Removal of two specified Mail Online articles for the duration of the trial.
  • No further summary contempt proceedings necessary as trial concluded.