Abstract
Two recent decisions afford contrasting examples of the operation of section 10 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, which grants a writer or publisher a limited privilege to withhold the source of published information. The privilege acknowledges the importance of maintaining the flow of information to the public about matters of legitimate public concern, a process which may depend on a journalist's ability to keep a promise of anonymity or non-attributability made to his source. The privilege is lost, however, where it is “established to the satisfaction of the court that disclosure is necessary in the interests of justice or national security or for the prevention of disorder or crime”. Since these exceptions are widely stated and reflect public interests of (potentially) equal importance with the flow of information to the press, the application of section 10 inevitably depends on the court's assessment of the comparative weight of the conflicting interests in the circumstances of the particular case.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
