Freedom of Expression in UK Law
-
London Regional Transport v Mayor of London
“
Whether or not undertakings of confidentiality had been signed, both domestic law and Art. 10(2) would recognise the propriety of suppressing wanton or self-interested disclosure of confidential information; but both correspondingly recognise the legitimacy of disclosure, undertakings notwithstanding, if the public interest in the free flow of information and ideas will be served by it.
-
Percy v DPP
“
I have no difficulty in principle with the concept that there will be circumstances in which citizens of this country and visiting foreign nationals should be protected from intentionally and gratuitously insulting behaviour, causing them alarm or distress. There may well be a pressing social need to protect people from such behaviour.
-
R Gallastegui (Appellant) Westminster City Council and Others (Respondent) Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis (First Interested Party) Secretary of State for the Home Department (Second Interested Party)
“
The correct general approach to the question of whether an interference with a Convention right is justified is not in doubt.The correct general approach to the question of whether an interference with a Convention right is justified is not in doubt. First, the limitation on the right must be "prescribed by law". First, the limitation on the right must be "prescribed by law".
-
Gaunt v Ofcom Liberty (Intervener)
“
In these circumstances, and taking full account of the claimant's Article 10 rights, we consider that OFCOM were justified in their conclusion, the terms of which we have quoted in paragraph 11 above. The broadcast was undoubtedly highly offensive to Mr Stark and was well capable of offending the broadcast audience.
-
The Queen (Lord Carlile of Berriew & others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
“
Moreover, the court has to consider the value of the right not in the abstract but in the context in which the appellants seek to exercise it.
-
Richard Roberts v R
“
Paragraph 89 echoes the understanding that the conscientious motives of protestors will be taken into account when they are sentenced for their offences but that there is in essence a bargain or mutual understanding operating in such cases. A sense of proportion on the part of the offenders in avoiding excessive damage or inconvenience is matched by a relatively benign approach to sentencing.
-
R (Laporte) v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire Constabulary
“
The approach of the English common law to freedom of expression and assembly was hesitant and negative, permitting that which was not prohibited.
-
Freedom of Expression in Ethiopia: The Jurisprudential Dearth
It is almost a decade and half since freedom of expression has been proclaimed as one of the fundamental rights and freedoms recognized in the FDRE Constitution. However, there is hardly any Ethiop...
-
Comedy as freedom of expression
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate the practice of comedians in relation to freedom of expression, so as to throw light on the issue of giving or avoiding offence. Design/methodo...
- When the ‘Interests of Justice’ Outweigh Freedom of Expression
-
The implications of digital rights management for privacy and freedom of expression
This paper aims to examine some of the broader social consequences of enabling digital rights management. The authors suggest that the current, mainstream orientation of digital rights management s...
- ECOWAS Court Finds Togo Violated Freedom Of Expression During 2017 Protests
- Privacy v. Freedom of Expression - the Right to Privacy under the Human Rights Act 1998
-
Injunctions against unknown persons’ protest activity: requirements clarified
In a judgment hailed as a victory by campaigners for human rights, the Court of Appeal confirmed that although injunctions are available to restrain unknown persons from illegal protest activities,......... activities, this must be carefully balanced against their right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. It warned that a court should be ......
-
The Defamation Act 2013: To sue or not to sue?
The Defamation Act 2013 (“the Act”) reformed the law relating to slander and libel in England. It was heralded by a Justice Minister as “the end of a long and hard fought battle to ensure a fair ba......... battle to ensure a fair balance is struck between the right to freedom of expression and people’s ability to protect their reputation.” Many ......