Search Results

1-5 of 5 results for subject:Injunctions

Show detailed: On Off

Results: 10 20 50 100

Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he plans to apply for the lifting of the injunction presently in force against the Mail on Sunday. - Inc ref to 300 c215-6W.

Asked by

Norman Baker (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

10 November 1997

Reference

14696; 300 c418-9W

House

House of Commons

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if the injunction against the Mail on Sunday remains in force following the publication of further disclosures from David Shayler on 2nd November.

Asked by

Ivan Lewis (Labour)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

4 November 1997

For answer on

5 November 1997

Answered on

5 November 1997

Mr. Ivan Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if the injunction against The Mail on Sunday remains in force following the publication of further disclosures from David Shayler on 2 November. [14900] Mr. Straw: Yes. The purpose of the injunction which the High Court granted against The Mail on Sunday was to prevent it from publishing any further material which could damage national security. The terms of the injunction restrained the newspaper from publishing any information provided by Mr. Shayler, but expressly did not apply to the publication of any material in respect of which the Crown serves written notice that it does not seek to restrain publication. The Editor of The Mail on Sunday provided me with a draft of the article which he proposed to publish well in advance of the publication date. This enabled me to obtain an assessment from the Director General of the Security Service, who advised me that the article would not cause damage to national security if it were published. Notice was therefore given that we would not seek to restrain publication. The fact that the article was substantially wrong is another matter. The issue here is not necessarily whether a story is true or false as it is quite possible to conceive circumstances in which false accusations might nevertheless cause damage to national security. This is entirely consistent with the position which the Government have adopted all along. Our concern is to ensure that nothing is published which is likely to damage national security. Former members of the Security and Intelligence Services are in a position to make disclosures which intentionally or unintentionally can cause real damage to national security. The Government cannot stand by and let that happen. We have, however, never sought to suppress criticism of the Security Service--even where that criticism is misguided or inaccurate--provided that national security is not damaged.

Date

5 November 1997

Reference

14900; 300 c215-6W

House

House of Commons

Lord Chancellors Dept

What assessment he has made of the increase in the use by United Kingdom companies of court injunctions as a means of preventing criticism; what guidance he has given the courts on the use of injunctions in such a way; and if he will place a copy of such guidance...

Asked by

Ann Clwyd (Labour)

Answering body

Lord Chancellor's Department

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

12 June 1997

Reference

2790; 295 c548W

House

House of Commons

Protection from Harassment Bill 1996/97

Protection from Harassment Bill. Lords committee stage. New clause considered. Clauses 1 to 16 agreed to. Bill reported with an amendment. (HL Bill 85 1996/97).

Department

Lord Chancellor's Department

Type

Committee of the Whole House (HL); Debates on bills

Date

17 February 1997

Reference

578 c511-44

House

House of Lords

Protection from Harassment Bill 1996/97

Protection from Harassment Bill. Lords second reading debate. Agreed to on question. Committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

Lead member

Lord Mackay of Clashfern

Answering member

Baroness Gould of Potternewton

Department

Lord Chancellor's Department

Type

Debates on bills

Date

24 January 1997

Reference

577 c917-43

House

House of Lords

Librarians' tools

Type

House

Session

Month

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher