Which court decided it?

High Court (Divisional Court) in 2011. Neutral citation: [2011] EWHC 418 (Admin).

Why does it matter for UK journalists?

Publication during active trial of prejudicial visual material breaches s.2(2). Fault of individual editors not required — strict liability applies. Fines of substantial size to signal seriousness.

HM Attorney General v Associated Newspapers Ltd

[2011] EWHC 418 (Admin) — High Court (Divisional Court), 2011

Last reviewed: 14 July 2026Next review due: 14 January 2027

What the court held

The Daily Mail and Daily Mirror were fined for publishing photographs of a murder defendant holding a firearm during the trial. The Divisional Court held that publication of images liable to prejudice the jury was strict-liability contempt.

Key rulings

Publication during active trial of prejudicial visual material breaches s.2(2).
Fault of individual editors not required — strict liability applies.
Fines of substantial size to signal seriousness.

Topics

Contempt of courtStrict liabilityphotographs

Acts cited

Contempt of Court Act 1981

Authoritative source

Read the full judgment on BAILII (British and Irish Legal Information Institute):

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/418.html

Related landmark cases

Landmark caseAttorney General v MGN Ltd [2011] EWHC 2074 (Admin)Read →Landmark caseAttorney General v Yaxley-Lennon [2019] EWHC 1791 (QB)Read →

Case summaries are drafted by UK JournoHub Editorial for practising UK journalists. They are not legal advice. Always consult primary sources and, for high-risk stories, take specialist legal advice.