Venables & Thompson v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2001] EWHC 32
Perpetual injunction granted to protect the identities of two notorious murderers.
Facts
The claimants were notorious murderers who were convicted at the age of 11. Injunctions which restricted the information which the media could publish about them came to an end when they reached 18. They sought further injunctions, under the inherent jurisdiction of the court, which would prevent publication of information regarding their appearance, whereabouts and new identities upon release.
Issue
The claimants alleged that there were at a real risk of revenge attacks and the Court should therefore exercise its inherent jurisdiction to grant an injunction restraining publication against the world. Further, any concerns about interference with freedom expression should be considered in light of the evidence of murder threats against the claimants. The claimants relied upon the positive obligations established under Article 2 European Convention on Human Rights which imposes a positive obligation to protect individuals against violation of Convention rights by another private individual. The defendants argued that it was inappropriate to exercise the court’s inherent jurisdiction to create ad hoc exceptions from the right to freedom of expression.
Held
The claimants’ application was granted. They were uniquely notorious individuals and were at an ongoing risk of serious physical harm. Their Article 2 rights demanded protection which could be provided by an extension of the law of confidence. The Court was therefore required to exercise its inherent jurisdiction to widen the scope of the protection of confidential information, even to the extent of placing restrictions on the freedom of expression of the press. Nevertheless, any restriction on the right of the press to publish information had to be given a narrow interpretation in line with Article 10(2) ECHR.
282 words
Updated 20 March 2026
This case summary accurately reflects the decision in Venables and Thompson v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2001] EWHC 32 (Fam), in which Butler-Sloss P granted perpetual injunctions protecting the identities and whereabouts of the claimants upon their release from custody.
Readers should be aware of significant subsequent developments. The injunctions have been the subject of further litigation. In Venables v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2019] EWHC 494 (Fam), Warby J extended the injunctions, maintaining protection of the claimants’ new identities. There have been further applications and reported breaches over the years, confirming that the injunctions remain in force but continue to require active judicial management. The underlying legal principles — particularly the use of the law of confidence extended by the court’s inherent jurisdiction to protect Convention rights, including Article 2 (right to life) and Article 8 (right to private life), balanced against Article 10 (freedom of expression) — remain good law and have been applied in subsequent cases. The Human Rights Act 1998 and the Convention articles discussed in the case continue in force. Students should note that the legal framework for balancing privacy and freedom of expression has developed further since 2001, including through cases such as Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] UKHL 22, but this does not affect the accuracy of the summary as a statement of the 2001 decision. The article is broadly accurate as a case summary, though it does not reflect the subsequent litigation history.
