TradeCopyright - infringement - intellectual property rights - not inconsistent with right to freedom of expressionAshdown v Telegraph Group Ltd: ChD (Sir Andrew Morritt V-C): 11 January 2001The claimant, who was a prominent politician, made a minute of a meeting he attended with the Prime Minister, a copy of which was disclosed to the defendant newspaper.

The defendant then published a series of articles closely based on the information contained in the minute.

The claimant commenced proceedings for breach of confidence and infringement of copyright.

At the claimant's application for summary judgment on the copyright claim, the defendant contended that intellectual property rights constituted a restriction on the exercise of the right to freedom of expression.

By article 10(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights any such restriction must be limited to that which was necessary in a democratic society.

That limitation could not be satisfied by the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, accordingly in every copyright infringement case the court had to consider the facts and determine whether the restriction on freedom of expression was necessary.Richard Spearman QC (instructed by Bates Wells & Braithwaite) for the claimant.

Andrew Nicol QC and James Mellor (instructed by Olswang) for the defendant.Held, allowing the claimant's application, that the provisions of the 1988 Act alone satisfied the requirement of article 10(2) that any restriction on the right of freedom of expression should be 'necessary in a democratic society'; that there was no reason why the court should travel outside the provisions of the 1988 Act and recognise on the facts of particular cases further or other exceptions to the restrictions on the exercise of freedom of expression constituted by the 1988 Act; that the defendant could not make out a defence under either section 30 or section 171(3); and that the claimant's application succeeded.