TNAG-1694-FCO40-2344-Broadcasting-in-Hong-Kong-1987 — Page 84

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

ate:

Time:

Reporter:

24.8.87

10 11 am

CNB/12

public interest, then the court should favour the preservation of confidentiality, unless that other

But in this case public interest outweights it. there is more than the public interest of

Here, unlike the not preserving confidentiality. infrequent case where a company wishes to prevent, to its financial detriment, the publication of its trade secrets, there is the following additional public interest factor accepted by the Vice-Chancellor and stated in these words:

'There remains what Mr Mummery urges is the

remaining public interest, namely, to prevent general dissemination of the contents of this book through the press within the United Kingdom so that by discouraging general dissemination those who are tempted to follow Mr Wright's example in the future and write their memoirs hot from the Security Service will not find it such a satisfactory or profitable business. The Vice-Chancellor then gave his assessment of the significance of this public interest. He said:

'I think there is force in that. I think that

the ability to restrain the unauthorised use of confidential memoirs by those who do not mind abusing their confidence, so as to discourage

I do not others from doing it, is a real point. think it can be just swept aside.' The Vice-Chancellor then accepted that the United Kingdom is likely to be the best market for anybody writing these memoirs and to discourage the use of that market would be a discouragement indeed."

So there Lord Ackner appears to be approving the approach of Mr Justice Millett but it is fair to say that he then went on to "muddy the water" somewhat by adopting what Lord Templeman said as to the relevance and applicability of Article 10. the Lord who was involved in The other Lord

-

the Appeal in the House of Lords, Lord Bridge explicit upon this subject.

said nothing

Apart from Lord Ackner, therefore, none of

I find it difficult to accept their Lordships addressed the point. that in such circumstances they intended a pronouncement of law significantly different from the law as stated by Mr Justice Millett. In my view their decision is authority for no more than emphasising that the proper approach includes paying considerable regard to

That is, in fact, how freedom of speech as defined in Article 10.

VERBATIM REPORTERS

HONG KONG

5-8496480 5-497048 5-8496981 5-8932546 5-8122436

012