header-logo header-logo

24 April 2008 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 7318 / Categories: Features , Local government , Media , Public
printer mail-detail

A necessary evil?

Does banning political adverts on television breach freedom of expression laws? Neil Parpworth reports

Section 321(2) of the Communications Act 2003 (CA 2003) prohibits political advertising on the television. In the recent case of R (on the application of Animal Defenders International) v Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport [2008] UKHL 15, [2008] All ER (D) 155 (Mar) the House of Lords was required to determine a leapfrog appeal from a decision of the Divisional Court in which that court had refused to declare the provision incompatible with Art 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention): (see [2006] EWHC 3069 (Admin), [2006] All ER (D) 30 (Dec)).

It should be noted, in passing, that the appellants did not pursue an alternative claim before the Divisional Court to the effect that the provisions containing the prohibition should be “read down” under s 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) since it was common ground that the wording of CA 2003, s 321 was clear.

 

The Facts

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll