Bunn v British Broadcasting Corporation and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 19 June 1998 |
| Date | 19 June 1998 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
Chancery Division
Before Mr Justice Lightman
Confidentiality - statement under caution - onus on defendant to justify interference with obligation of confidence
A statement made by an accused under caution to the police was confidential.
Accordingly, where an applicant sought an injunction to restrain a defendant journalist from publicising the contents of such a statement, the onus ordinarily on an applicant to establish grounds to displace the presumption in favour of the freedom of the press shifted to the defendant to justify the interference with the obligation of confidence owed to the applicant.
Mr Justice Lightman so stated in a judgment delivered in open court after a hearing in camera in the Chancery Division when dismissing the application of the plaintiff, Mr Robert Bunn, for an injunction restraining
(i) the British Broadcasting Corporation from including in a television series, The Fraud busters, any material contained in an interview under caution with the City of London Police given by him, and
(ii) the second defendant, Victor Gollancz Ltd, from including the statement in a book of the series.
The plaintiff had been deputy managing director (finance) of Robert Maxwell Group plc and had been arrested and charged with conspiracy to defraud.
The Serious Fraud Office had conduct of the prosecution and mounted two trials in respect of a number of accused. The plaintiff admitted certain of the charges against him, was acquitted of one, and one was ordered to remain on the file.
No convictions were secured in the first trial and the second trial was ordered to be stayed. The failure of the two prosecutions resulted in considerable adverse criticism of the SFO.
Thereafter the BBC decided to present a series of television programmes relating to the work of the SFO entitled The Fraudbusters to be published in book form by Victor Gollancz Ltd.
The BBC notified the plaintiff of, inter alia, the intended reference to the statement in the series on the SFO. The plaintiff applied for an injunction.
Mr Jonathan Crystal for Mr Bunn; Mr Mark Warby for the BBC; Mr Jonathan Rayner James, QC, for Victor Gollancz Ltd.
MR JUSTICE LIGHTMAN said that there was undoubtedly a public interest in the presentation of material enabling the public to judge whether the performance of the SFO in respect of the two Maxwell trials was properly to be criticised. The onus was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
HM Revenue and Customs v Banerjee (No 2)
...the necessary quality of confidence, whatever the extent of actual public knowledge about it may be. So, for example, in Bunn v BBC [1998] 3 All ER 552, Lightman J held at 557e that confidence could no longer attach to a witness statement which the judge at an earlier hearing had read to hi......
-
Frankson and Others v Home Office; Johns and another v Home Office
...next to look at those authorities that deal with the confidentiality of statements made to the police. The first is Bunn v The British Broadcasting Corporation and Another [1998] 3ALL E.R. 552. In that case the plaintiff was tried for conspiracy to defraud. During the trial reference was ma......
-
BC v Chief Constable, Police Scotland
...[2017] ECHR 754; [2017] IRLR 1032; 44 BHRC 17 Benedik v Slovenia (62357/14) [2018] ECHR 363 Bunn v British Broadcasting Corporation [1998] 3 All ER 552; [1998] EMLR 846; [1999] FSR 70 Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] UKHL 22; [2004] 2 AC 457; [2004] 2 WLR 1232; [2004] 2 All ER ......
-
Woolgar v Chief Constable of Sussex Police and Another
...in order to protect the public and in particular children." 43Another recent example to which we were referred is Bunn v B.B.C. [1998] 3 All E.R. 552. A plaintiff who had faced trial for conspiracy to defraud tried to stop the defendants from including in a broadcast and in a book admissio......