Demon case - The Bulger Injunction, July 2001

[This version is provided by http://www.cyber-rights.org]

Originally at http://www.courtservice.gov.uk/notices/comm/queens_venables1.htm

Commercial Court Notices

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE 2001 Folio 630

TAKE NOTICE THAT IF YOU NEGLECT TO OBEY THIS ORDER YOU MAY BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND LIABLE TO IMPRISONMENT OR SEQUESTRATION OF YOUR ASSETS

No. HQ 0004737 and HQ 0004986

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

BEFORE THE HONOURABLE DAME ELIZABETH BUTLER-SLOSS, PRESIDENT OF THE FAMILY DIVISION, sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London

BETWEEN

JON VENABLES

First Claimant

-and-

ROBERT THOMPSON

Second Claimant

-and-

NEWS GROUP NEWSPAPERS LIMITED

ASSOCIATED NEWSPAPERS LIMITED

MGN LIMITED

Defendants

UPON HEARING Leading and Junior Counsel for each of the Claimants, for the Defendants, for the Attorney-General as friend of the Court and for the Official Solicitor as friend of the Court, Counsel for the Secretary of State of the Home Department and Leading Counsel for Thus Plc

AND UPON READING the Court Bundles filed herein

AND FURTHER to Orders made herein on 22 June 2001 and 10 July 2001

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. An injunction is hereby granted restraining until further order the Defendants and any person with notice of this order (whether by themselves or by their servants or agents or otherwise howsoever or in the case of a company whether by is directors or officers servants or agents or otherwise howsoever) from:

(1) publishing or causing to be published in any newspaper or broadcasting in any sound or television broadcast or by means of any cable or satellite programme service or public computer network:

(a) any depiction, image in any form, photograph, film or voice recording made or taken on or after the 18^th February 1993, of the Claimants, Jon Venables or Robert Thompson (excluding police photographs of the Claimant, Robert Thompson, taken on 18^th February 1993, or of Jon Venables, taken on 20^th February 1993) or any description of their physical appearance, voices or accents at any time since that date in so far as such description would be likely to lead to or assist in the identification of either of them;

(b) (in the event of either of the Claimants adopting a new name and other identifying particulars) any information likely to lead to the identification of that Claimant as having formerly been known as Jon Venables (in the case of the First Claimant) or Robert Thompson (in the case of the Second Claimant); or

(c) any information likely to lead to the identification of the past, present or future whereabouts (including all residential or work addresses and telephone numbers) of the said Claimants or either of them since the 18^th February 1993, save that the establishments at which either of the Claimants has been held on detention during Her Majesty's pleasure may be identified no earlier than 12 months after the date announced by the Secretary of State for the Home Department as the date by which both Claimants have been released on licence;

(2) soliciting any information within paragraphs 1(1)(a) or (b) hereof at any time from any person; or

(3) soliciting any information within paragraph 1(1)(c) hereof from any current staff, carers, detainees or providers of therapy at any secure unit at which either of the Claimants has been held, earlier than 12 months after the date announced by the Secretary of State for the Home Department as the date by which both Claimants have been released on licence;

PROVIDED THAT nothing in this order shall of itself prevent any person:

publishing any particulars of or information relating to any part of the proceedings before any court other than a court sitting in private;
publishing any information already in the public domain at the date of the original Order dated 8^th January 2001 (save as referred to in paragraph 2 hereof); or
soliciting information in the course of or for the purpose of the exercise by the person soliciting such information of any duty or function authorised by statute or by any court of competent jurisdiction.

PARAGRAPH (1) ABOVE SHALL APPLY SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING PROVISO in relation to any internet service provider ("ISP"), its employees and agents:

(a) an ISP shall not be in breach of this injunction unless it, or any of its employees or agents:

knew that the material had been placed on its servers or could be accessed via its service; or
knew that the material was likely to be placed on its servers, or was likely to be accessed via its service; and in either case
failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent the publication;

(b) an employee or agent of an ISP shall not be in breach of this injunction unless he or it:

knew that the material had been placed on its servers or could be accessed via its service; or
knew that the material was likely to be placed on its servers or was likely to be accessed via its service; and in either case
failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent the publication and to induce the ISP to prevent the publication;

(c) an ISP, employee or agent shall be considered to know anything which he or it would have known if he or it had taken reasonable steps to find out;

(d) "taking all reasonable steps to prevent the publication" includes the taking of all reasonable steps to remove the material from the ISP's servers or to block access to the material.

2. Proviso (ii) to paragraph 1 of this order shall not apply so as to permit the publication of material falling within paragraphs 1(1)(a) or (b) of this order merely on the ground that such material has at any time been published on the internet and/or outside England and Wales.

3. For the avoidance of doubt, it is declared that:

(a) the orders made in respect of the Claimants on 26 November 1993 by Mr Justice Moreland and on 27 July 2000 by the President are of no further effect; and

(b) this order is not to be read as in any way restricting or otherwise derogating from the Claimants' rights to confidentiality in such matters as their detailed medical and therapeutic treatment.

4. Copies of this Order endorsed with a penal notice be served by the First and Second Claimants' Solicitors on:

(a) such newspapers and sound or television broadcasting or cable or satellite programme services and public computer networks as they may think fit, in the case of a public computer network, by e-mail and in each other case by facsimile transmission or pre-paid first class post addressed to the Editor in the case of a newspaper, or Senior News Editor in the case of a broadcasting or cable or satellite programme service, or person responsible for any public computer network in the case of that network; and

(b) on such other persons as the First or Second Claimants' Solicitors may think fit in each case by personal service.

5. Any person affected by the injunction set out at paragraph 1 above is at liberty to apply upon 24 hours notice in writing to all parties.

DATED this 10^th day of July 2001

No. HQ 0004737 and HQ 0004986

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

BEFORE THE HONOURABLE DAME ELIZABETH BUTLER-SLOSS, PRESIDENT OF THE FAMILY DIVISION, sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London

BETWEEN

JON VENABLES

First Claimant

-and-

ROBERT THOMPSON

Second Claimant

-and-

NEWS GROUP NEWSPAPERS LIMITED

ASSOCIATED NEWSPAPERS LIMITED

MGN LIMITED

Defendants

UPON HEARING Leading Counsel for the Attorney-General and Counsel for the first Claimant and Leading Counsel for Thus Plc

IT IS ORDERED that paragraph 1 of the Court's Order dated 8^th January 2001 (as amended on 22^nd June 2001) shall apply subject to the following proviso in relation to any internet service provider ("ISP"), its employees and agents:

1. (a) an ISP shall not be in breach of this injunction unless it, or any of its employees or agents:

knew that the material had been placed on its servers or could be accessed via its service; or
knew that the material was likely to be placed on its servers, or was likely to be accessed via its service; and in either case
failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent the publication;

(b) an employee or agent of an ISP shall not be in breach of this injunction unless he or it:

knew that the material had been placed on its servers or could be accessed via its service: or
knew that the material was likely to be placed on its servers or was likely to be accessed via its service; and in either case
failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent the publication and to induce the ISP to prevent the publication;

(c) an ISP, employee or agent shall be considered to know anything which he or it would have known if he or it had taken reasonable steps to find out;

(d) "taking all reasonable steps to prevent the publication" includes the taking of all reasonable steps to remove the material from the ISP's servers or to block access to the material.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that paragraph 4(a) of the Court's Order dated 8^th January 2001 be amended to read as follows:-

4. Copies of this Order endorsed with a penal notice be served by the First and Second Claimants' Solicitors on:

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that there be detailed assessment of first Claimant's costs pursuant to Regulation 107 of the Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the original Order be redrawn with the above amendments and re-served on the Defendants' and the Second Claimant's solicitors.

DATED this 10^th day of July 2001.