HM Attorney General v Random House Group Ltd

HM Attorney General v Random House Group Ltd

The court held that further sales of the book would create a substantial risk that the course of justice in the ongoing criminal trial would be seriously impeded, primarily by causing procedural disruption such as applications to discharge the jury or appeals, even though the risk of serious prejudice to the jury's verdict was not established. The risk was not merely incidental to a discussion of public affairs, as the passages complained of related directly to the acts leading to the trial. In the unique circumstances of this case, an injunction was necessary and proportionate to protect the administration of justice, outweighing the publisher's and public's right to freedom of expression.

Parties
Claimant: Her Majesty's Attorney General; Defendant: Random House Group Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Application for Injunction (contempt of Court) / Interlocutory Judgment
Outcome
Injunction granted
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Freedom of Expression, Injunctions, Fair Trial Rights
Criminal Law Media Law Constitutional Law Contempt of Court Freedom of Expression Injunctions Fair Trial Rights

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 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Attorney General

Claimant

Random House Group Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Injunction (contempt of Court) / Interlocutory Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether publication of the book creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in an ongoing criminal trial will be seriously impeded or prejudiced under the Contempt of Court Act 1981 s.2(2)
  2. 2 Whether an injunction restraining publication is necessary and proportionate under the Human Rights Act 1998 and Article 10 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the publication is protected as a discussion of public affairs under s.5 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that further sales of the book would create a substantial risk that the course of justice in the ongoing criminal trial would be seriously impeded, primarily by causing procedural disruption such as applications to discharge the jury or appeals, even though the risk of serious prejudice to the jury's verdict was not established. The risk was not merely incidental to a discussion of public affairs, as the passages complained of related directly to the acts leading to the trial. In the unique circumstances of this case, an injunction was necessary and proportionate to protect the administration of justice, outweighing the publisher's and public's right to freedom of expression.

Court Disposition

Injunction granted

Orders

  • The publisher is restrained from distributing the book or publicising the contents of pages 258-262 until the conclusion of the ongoing criminal trial.