Start Submission Become a Reviewer

Reading: Case Comment: Khuja v Times Newspapers Limited [2017] UKSC 49

Download

A- A+
Alt. Display

Case reports

Case Comment: Khuja v Times Newspapers Limited [2017] UKSC 49

Author:

Joe Purshouse

University of East AngliaNone
X close

Abstract

In what circumstances can an individual suppress through an injunction the dissemination of information identifying him as someone who has been arrested by the police, but not subsequently convicted of a criminal offence? This issue, considered by the Supreme Court in Khuja v Times Newspapers Limited (Khuja),[1] unearths a tension between the long-standing principle of open justice, and the freedom of the press to report true and accurate information about the criminal justice system on one side, and privacy interests on the other. Where the matter leading to an arrest relates to allegations of the sexual abuse of children the effect on the privacy interests of the arrestee is likely to be particularly severe; putting the arrestee in a category of persons most loathed and feared by society. It is for this reason that the decision of the Supreme Court by a majority of 5-2, which fell decisively on the side of open justice and the freedom of the press, merits consideration.




[1]Khuja v Times Newspapers Limited [2017] UKSC 49.

How to Cite: Purshouse, J., 2018. Case Comment: Khuja v Times Newspapers Limited [2017] UKSC 49. Journal of Information Rights, Policy and Practice, 2(2), p.None. DOI: http://doi.org/10.21039/irpandp.v2i2.47
Published on 14 Mar 2018.
Peer Reviewed

Downloads

  • PDF (EN)

    comments powered by Disqus