Our offices are open as usual over the Easter break

Attorney-General v Jonathan Cape Ltd

288 words (1 pages) Case Summary in Cases

07/03/18 Cases Reference this

Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our professional writers as a learning aid to help you with your studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of UK Essays.

If you would like to view samples of the work produced by our academic writers please click here.

Attorney-General v Jonathan Cape Ltd and Others [1976] QB 752

Joint responsibility; public policy; publication

(256 words)


A Cabinet minister kept a diary of Cabinet discussions and events with the intention to once publish the contents in a book. After the minister’s death, volume one of the book (Diaries of a Cabinet Minister) was sent for approval to and rejected by the Secretary of the Cabinet. Despite an undertaking by literary executors not to publish the book without prior notice to the Treasury Solicitor, parts of the book were published wihout consent. The Attorney-General applied for an injunction against the publishers.


The reason for the Attorney-General’s request for an injunction was publishing the book would be contrary to the public interest. More specifically, the doctrine of collective responsibility required details of Cabinet discussions and potential differences to be kept confidential.


The Court held that it had the power to stop the publication of information that was in breach of confidence based on public policy grounds. The preservation of the doctrine of collective responsibility within the Cabinet was held to be in the public interest. Agreeing with the Attorney-General, the Court found that the revelation of individual Mnisters’ views and opinions disclosed within the framework of confidential Cabinet meetings would undermine the doctrine – at least until a certain period time passed. In this particular case, however, 10 years had passed and the volume one did not contain any information that should have remained confidential. Consequently, the injunction was rejected and publication was allowed to go ahead.

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

DMCA / Removal Request

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please.

ここに adulttorrent.org

続きを読みます adulttorrent.org

ここで読みます adulttorrent.org

Current Offers