Page 216 - Law and the Media

Contempt of Court
programme was broadcast. Cogent evidence will be needed to show that all reasonable care
had been taken by the publisher to try to discover the true position. Section 3 requires a high
standard of care.

The existence of negligence will, of course, destroy this defence.

Fair and accurate contemporary reports
Section 4(1) provides that:

...a person is not guilty of contempt of court under the strict liability rule in
respect of a fair and accurate report of legal proceedings held in public, published
contemporaneously and in good faith.

The elements of the defence are that the report must:

Be fair and accurate
Relate to proceedings held in public (in other words that the public are freely
entitled to attend)
Be published ‘contemporaneously’ (in other words during or as soon as practical
after the hearing)
Be published in good faith (in other words honestly and without ulterior
motive).

Reports published in this way are also safe from libel proceedings (see Chapter 1).

The same section of the CCA gives the court powers to postpone reports of the proceedings
or any part of them if otherwise the administration of justice in those proceedings is likely
to be prejudiced (see Chapter 9).

Misreporting what was said in court, for example by including in a report elements that were
not put to the jury, may be a contempt under Section 4.

Discussion of public affairs
Section 5 of the CCA provides:

...a publication made as, or as part of, a discussion in good faith of public affairs
or other matters of general public interest is not to be treated as a contempt of court
under the strict liability rule if the risk of impediment or prejudice to particular
legal proceedings is merely incidental to the discussion.

This defence did not exist before 1981. Its introduction was recommended in the 1974 report
by the Phillimore Committee, which concluded that it was wrong to bring to a halt publicized
debates about matters of general public interest simply because legal proceedings had arisen
which reflected the issues being debated. The purpose of the defence is to comply with the
Article 10 European Convention on Human Rights right to freedom of expression.
179