• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

Card Range To Study

through

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/3

Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

3 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

Facts

W, a former member of MI5 had retired, moved to Tasmania and written a book called 'spycatcher' detailing various matters about his time in MI5, including allegations of improper conduct by MI5. The revelations breached his contract with the crown and Official Secrets Act 1911. Therefore there was no possibility of publication in the UK. Instead W attempted to publish in Australia. The Crown commenced proceedings in NSW to try and prevent this, Two UK newspapers (Guardian and Observer) published articles summarising the litigation in NSW including an account of W's allegations. in 1987, the Sunday times which had bough the serialisation rights, published the first instalment of its serialisation. This was 2 days before the whole book was due to be published in the USA. The AG obtained an interlocutory injunction against the newspapers. All the newspapers appealed to the HL.

Questions for the HL

Could 3rd parties be bound by obligations of confidence that they knew to bind the discloser of information


Could publication in the public interest extinguish an obligation of confidence


Did the information lose its 'quality of confidence' by virtue of publication in the USA

HL findings

Third parties could be bound by an obligation of confidence that they knew W to be under, so as to prevent publications they had been given in breach of confidence, unless the duty was extinguished by the information becoming public knowledge or the public interest justified the publication.


In this case there had been no breach of confidence by the guardian or observer as their articles contained information readily available and caused no further damage


The Sunday Times was in breach of confidence by publishing the first instalment. Imminent publication in the USA did not justify that. Therefore they were liable for an account of profits


However as the publication of the whole book had now occurred there was no justification for an injunction against any newspapers.