Attorney General v Jonathan Cape Ltd [1975] 3 All ER 484

Court: Court of Appeal

Facts: The Attorney General sought an injunction to prevent Jonathan Cape Ltd and the Sunday Times from publishing the diaries of the late Richard Crossman, a former Cabinet minister. The diaries contained records of Cabinet discussions and confidential advice about civil servants. The Attorney General argued that publication would undermine the doctrine of collective responsibility by disclosing confidential Cabinet discussions.

Issue: Whether the court should restrain the publication of the diaries to protect the doctrine of collective responsibility and maintain government confidentiality.

Held: The court held that while it had the power to restrain the disclosure of confidential information to protect the doctrine of collective responsibility, in this instance, there was no sufficient public interest to warrant such restraint. Lord Widgery LCJ acknowledged that while confidentiality is important, the court should only intervene in clear cases where the necessity of confidentiality is demonstrated.

Key Judicial Statement: Lord Widgery LCJ recognized the doctrine of collective responsibility and the need for Cabinet discussions to remain confidential. However, he emphasized that the court’s intervention should be limited to clear cases where public interest demands restraint. He also noted that there should be a time limit after which the duty to restrain publication lapses, relying on the good sense of Ministers or ex-Ministers.

💡Leveluplaw: The case established that while conventions like the doctrine of collective responsibility can inform legal obligations, they are not inherently enforceable. Courts will balance the need to protect government confidentiality with the public interest in publishing information. Restraint on publication should be applied sparingly and only in clear cases where confidentiality is crucial to the public interest.