Attorney General v Associated Newspapers Ltd & Anor

Attorney General v Associated Newspapers Ltd & Anor

There was a substantial risk that a juror would see the prejudicial photograph published online during the trial, and the nature of the photograph created a substantial risk of serious prejudice to the fairness of the proceedings, satisfying the strict liability rule for contempt under the Contempt of Court Act 1981.

Parties
Claimant: Her Majesty’s Attorney General; 1st Defendant: Associated Newspapers Ltd; 2nd Defendant: News Group Newspapers Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Application for Committal for Contempt of Court / Judgment
Outcome
Both defendants found guilty of contempt of court under the strict liability rule.
Legal Topics
Strict Liability Contempt, Online Publication, Jury Prejudice, Fair Trial, Contempt of Court Act 1981
Criminal Law Media Law Contempt of Court Strict Liability Contempt Online Publication Jury Prejudice Fair Trial Contempt of Court Act 1981

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty’s Attorney General

Claimant

Associated Newspapers Ltd

1st Defendant

News Group Newspapers Ltd

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Committal for Contempt of Court / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether online publication of prejudicial photographs during an active criminal trial constitutes contempt under the strict liability rule of the Contempt of Court Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether the publications created a substantial risk that the course of justice would be seriously impeded or prejudiced

Ratio Decidendi

There was a substantial risk that a juror would see the prejudicial photograph published online during the trial, and the nature of the photograph created a substantial risk of serious prejudice to the fairness of the proceedings, satisfying the strict liability rule for contempt under the Contempt of Court Act 1981.

Court Disposition

Both defendants found guilty of contempt of court under the strict liability rule.

Orders

  • Court to hear submissions on penalty and costs.