The Contempt of Court Act 1981, has raised concerns about the use of orders under sections 4 and 11 of the Act to restrict the media’s ability to report court proceedings in accordance with the principle of open justice. However, the absence of any empirical survey of these orders has hampered a proper evaluation of their worth. This article elucidates the operation of reporting restrictions at Crown Court level by presenting and analysing the results of a survey of nine Crown Courts during the period 1982-89.

The objective of this article was to ensure that those with a professional interest in the making of orders restricting reports of legal proceedings should have access to a modern, practical guide to the statutory and common law principles which should be applied.

This document is an outline of reporting restrictions relating to criminal proceedings in the Crown Court of the United Kingdom, prepared through a joint initiative between the Senior Presiding Judge, the Judicial Studies Board, the Lord Chancellor’s Department and media organisations. It is designed to help promote greater understanding of problems in balancing the administration of justice and the need for openness in the courts to allow the media to inform the public.

This is an extract from the website of the Press Complaints Commission in the United Kingdom. It explains all the relevant laws relating to court reporting in the UK.

This is a super-injunction order that resulted in the setting up of the Committee on Super-Injunctions in the United Kingdom.

This is an extract from the website of the United States Federal Courts. It explains all the relevant laws relating to court reporting in the United States of America.

This is a report on the relevant laws pertaining to the media in Canada. It specifically addresses the issue of court reporting at various stages of a case such as trial, bail hearing, preliminary hearing and admissions. It also addresses the issue of confidentiality while reporting cases involving sexual violence.

This is a report of the Committee that was set up in the light of the RJW & SJW v. Guardian order. It discusses the practice and procedure governing interim injunctions which restrict freedom of speech, including super-injunctions and anonymised injunctions; the use of specialist judges to determine applications for super-injunctions; super-injunctions and the reporting of Parliamentary proceedings; and the collection of data about super-injunctions, and anonymised injunctions, and the communication of information concerning the same to Parliament and the public.

In this article, the author sets out a number of legal and policy implications of the utilisation of audio-visual broadcasting and information technology to broadcast and record judicial proceedings. He stresses on the importance of the public administration of justice, and examines whether the implementation of the principle of open justice needs to be reconsidered in light of contemporary techniques of broadcasting and dissemination of public information.

This article explores the tension between excessive media coverage and a criminal defendant’s right to a fair trial and jury, under the First Amendment and the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution respectively. It suggests that the American media has gone too far under a cloak of First Amendment protection, placing criminal defendants’ constitutional rights at risk through irresponsible journalism. The article concludes that the tools traditionally employed by courts to balance the rights of free press and fair trial are no longer effective.

This article provides a comparative perspective of American and British law and analyses why the phenomenon of super-injunctions is not prevalent in the American legal system.

This article analyses the benefits of permitting journalists to use social media in the courtroom. It also analyses the differing approaches taken by the Courts in Canada, United States, United Kingdom and Australia on the issue. It ultimately provides a draft policy relating to the use of social media in the courtroom while arguing for the standardisation of such policy in Australian courts.

This Guidance by the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales allows the use of live text-based communication in the courtroom. Interestingly, the Guidance also incorporates a Preamble and General Principles relating to communication from the courtroom.