header-logo header-logo

Newspaper

08 May 2015
Issue: 7651 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Aitken v Director of Public Prosecutions [2015] EWHC 1079 (Admin), [2015] All ER (D) 180 (Apr)

The appellant was the editor of a regional paper which published a report in breach of a reporting restriction order imposed under s 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933. The judge rejected the appellant’s submission that he had no case to answer, after which he pleaded guilty and was fined. The appellant appealed by way of case stated. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the editor of a newspaper did not, as a matter of law, fall outside the scope of the expression “any person who publishes” in s 39(2) of the Act.

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

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

A good book, a glass of chilled Albarino, and being creative for pleasure help Liz McGrath balance the rigours of complex bundles and being Head of Chambers

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Firm welcomes director in its financial services financial regulatory team

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Partner appointment in firm’s equity capital markets team

NEWS

Walkers and runners will take in some of London’s finest views at the 16th annual charity event

Law school partners with charity to give free assistance to litigants in need

Could the Labour government usher in a new era for digital assets, ask Keith Oliver, head of international, and Amalia Neenan FitzGerald, associate, Peters & Peters, in this week’s NLJ

An extra bit is being added to case citations to show the pecking order of the judges concerned. Former district judge Stephen Gold has the details, in his ‘Civil way’ column in this week’s NLJ

The Labour government’s position on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is not yet clear

back-to-top-scroll