Loading...
Jane Phillips 2018-06-21T14:38:17+00:00

Project Description

Jane Phillips

Jane Phillips

Call: 1989

“A go-getter…with shining intelligence who understands the industry well and is admired for her persuasive ways.”

Jane Phillips
Download Barrister CV
Email Clerks
020 7353 8845

Barrister Overview

Jane is a highly experienced and effective practitioner in all areas of media law, in particular defamation, privacy, breach of confidence, data protection, reporting restrictions, production orders, contempt and harassment. She is often called upon to apply for, or resist, emergency injunctions.

Jane has appeared at first instance, the Court of Appeal and in the Privy Council in numerous leading cases and has been at the forefront of developing the law in her field. Jane acted on behalf of numerous claimants in phone-hacking litigation against The News of the World and in News International’s Voicemail Interception Compensation Scheme.

In addition, Jane regularly advises in non-contentious matters where reputational issues arise such as employment and company disputes and other high-profile and press-sensitive controversies.  She also provides high-level pre-publication advice to major publishers and has been retained by Time Magazine for the past 20 years.

Jane advises in relation to claims in other common-law jurisdictions, including Hong Kong, Singapore, Jamaica and the Isle of Man.  She has recently advised on substantial libel litigation in Northern Ireland.

Recognition

Jane has been consistently recommended as a ‘Leading Junior’ in Defamation/Privacy in Chambers and Partners Guide to the Legal Profession and in The Legal 500 Directory, Legal Experts and Who’s Who Legal UK Bar. She has been described in previous editions as a ‘go-getter’ with ‘shining intelligence’ who ‘understands the industry well’ and who is ‘admired for her persuasive ways’.

“She is very effective and is great at providing strategic insight … She got through to the roots of the issue really quickly and gave us concrete advice” Chambers and Partners 2018 

“A specialist media law advocate, who gives effective legal advice.” The Legal 500 2017 

“I would recommend her for her clear, prompt, thorough and excellent advice…She is very calm and has a sharp legal mind…She is highly experienced and has an ability to grasp the key issues and deliver constructive advice. She is approachable, versatile and good at managing clients’ expectations.” Chambers and Partners 2017 

“She provides clear, practical and effective legal advice.” The Legal 500 2016

“She has an ability to quickly grasp the key issues and deliver constructive advice. She’s highly experienced, approachable and good at managing expectations…She is very effective and provides great strategic insight.” Chambers and Partners 2016

“She has very sound judgement and immense knowledge, and is a pleasure to work with.” The Legal 500 2015

“Highly personable, approachable, responsive, helpful and knowledgeable…She’s very effective and provides great strategic insight.” Chambers and Partners 2015

“She exudes confidence.” The Legal 500 2014

She has an ability to quickly grasp the key issues and deliver constructive advice. She’s approachable and good at managing clients’ expectations.” Chambers and Partners 2014

“A true specialist who exudes confidence”, noted for her “intelligence and creativity”. The Legal 500 2013/14 

While some counsel might be overly bullish or overly pessimistic in their diagnosis, she is always pragmatic and quick to give incisive advice” Chambers and Partners 2013

An absolutely excellent advocate” The Legal 500 2012/12

A go-to senior junior, who is incredibly pragmatic, knowledgeable, and sympathetic to the client…Her talents are sufficiently manifold that she can easily switch between claimant and defendant work.” Chambers and Partners 2012

Jane’s pre-publication advice has received praise in Alex Ferguson’s autobiography as `positive, practical and friendly’. 

Representative Cases

Defamation and Malicious Falsehood

Mionis v Demokratia (2017) – Junior Counsel for the successful claimant on appeal to the Court of Appeal on issue of enforcement of Tomlin Orders.

Dr Waghorn v General Medical Council (2017) – Successful application for the GMC for summary judgment in respect of a claim for libel and malicious falsehood by a doctor.

Shakeel Begg v BBC (2016) – Successful trial for the defendant against an Imam found to have preached jihad.

Citation Plc v Ellis Whittam Ltd (2013) EWCA Civ 155 – Junior Counsel at first instance and in Court of Appeal for successful defendant in a strike out application for abuse of process.

Dr Fish v Barnsley Hospital Trust (2013) – Successful libel claim on behalf of the claimant in case which settled on first day of trial.

Morrice v BBC (2013) – Junior Counsel for the defendant in its defence of a significant libel claim (asserting defences of justification, honest comment and responsible journalism) brought by a prominent geologist.

Dr White v Southampton University Trust (2011) – Successful strike application out on the grounds of absolute privilege.

Virginia McKenna v Associated Newspapers (2011) – Successful libel claim on behalf of the claimant against the Daily Mail.

Barbara Broccoli v Associated Newspapers (2011) – Successful libel claim on behalf of the claimant against the Daily Mail & the Mail on Sunday.

Lily Safra v Associated Newspapers (2011) – Successful libel claim on behalf of the claimant against the Daily Mail.

Trafigura v BBC (2009) – Acted for BBC in libel action arising out of Newsnight programme.

Bray v Deutsche Bank (2008-9) – Successful libel claim on behalf of the claimant arising out of a press release published by Deutsche Bank.

Taranissi v BBC (2008-9) – Successful libel claim on behalf of the claimant arising out of a Panorama programme “IVF uncovered”.

Materazzi v Various Newspapers (2007-8) – Successful libel claims on behalf of Marco Materazzi against The Sun, the Daily Mail and the Daily Star, arising out of head butting by Zinedine Zidane.

Bunt v Tilley, AOL and others (2006) – Successful application on the grounds that ISPs were not publishers at common law. Important rulings on section 1 of the Defamation Act 1996 and the E-Commerce regulations.

Davey v Dilnot (2006) – Represented the successful claimant at trial in libel claim.

Bardwaj v The International Society for Krishna Consciousness Ltd (2006) – Represented the successful defendant at trial of slander by gesture and assault.

Strachan v The Gleaner (2005) – Junior Counsel for successful defendant in Privy Council case on default judgments and jurisdiction.

Rackham v Sandy (2005) – Represented the successful claimant at trial in case of qualified privilege and malice.

Ken Bates v Dave Allen (2005) – Acted for the defendant in case brought by Leeds Football Club Chairman against the Chairman of Sheffield Wednesday Football Club.

Davies v Granada Television Limited (2004-5) – Acted for the defendants in successful application to strike out claimant’s claim arising out of “Facelifts from Hell” programme.

McArdle v Newcastle Chronicle (2004) – Acted for the defendant in case which settled at trial concerning allegations about a nursing home.

Williams v News International (2003) – Acted for Robbie Williams who received substantial damages from the News of the World.

Bonnick v The Gleaner (2002) 3 WLR 820 – Junior Counsel for successful defendants in Privy Council case on qualified privilege.

Mills v MGN Limited (2002) – Acted for Heather Mills who received substantial damages from the Sunday Mirror.

Ferguson v Associated Newspapers (2002) – Acted for Sir Alex Ferguson, in successful proceedings under sections 8 and 9 of the Defamation Act 1996.

Semenenko v MGN (2002) – Acted for the claimant who received substantial damages from the Sunday People.

Komarek v Ramco (2002) – Represented the Czech claimants at trial in case arising out of publication to the British Ambassador in Prague.

Khalili v Associated Newspapers (2000) EMLR 996 – Junior Counsel for claimant in successful appeal to Court of Appeal against dismissal of his case for want of prosecution.

Blackstone v MGN Limited (2000) – Represented the successful claimant at trial who obtained £50,000 damages against the Sunday Mirror arising out an article concerning a marital dispute.

Williamson v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis – Junior Counsel for defendant on claimant’s unsuccessful appeal against dismissal of his case for want of prosecution.

Adams v Associated Newspapers (1999) EMLR 26 – Junior Counsel for defendants in their appeal to the Court of Appeal on 3rd party proceedings in libel.

McCahill v Royal Sun Alliance and Thomas Howell Group (1999) – Represented the successful second defendant at trial.

Little v George (1998) – Represented the defendant in case on hunting.

Marks and Spencer v Granada (1998) – Represented the claimant in libel action which settled at trial.

Mori v BBC (1998) – Represented the defendant at trial in the first contested case concerning a live broadcast defence under section 1 of the Defamation Act 1996.

Allason v BBC and Hat Trick Productions (1998) – Represented the defendants at trial who successfully pleaded fair comment arising out of a “Have I Got News For You” annual which alleged that conservative MP was a “conniving little shit”.

C v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd and others (1997) 1 WLR 131 – Junior Counsel for defendants on claimants’ unsuccessful appeal to the Court of Appeal against strike out on limitation grounds.

Awwad v Geraghty (1997) – Represented the claimants at trial in costs proceedings arising out of a libel action.

Lloyd v Express Newspapers (LTL) 24/06/96 – Junior Counsel for claimant in the Court of Appeal by the defendants on severable allegations in libel (pre-cursor of Cruise v Express Newspapers).

Ashby v Times Newspapers Limited (1995) – Represented the defendant in five-week trial in successful defence of justification concerning allegation that conservative MP was gay. 

Adams v Associated Newspapers (1995) – Represented the claimant in 3rd party proceedings for libel brought by Associated Newspapers.

Upjohn v BBC and Professor Oswald (1994) – Represented the defendant in three-month trial arising out of a Panorama programme which made allegations of drug fraud.

Walker and Cartmell v Central Television (1991) – Represented the claimants in six-week trial arising out of an episode of The Cook Report making allegations concerning animal experimentation. 

Privacy/breach of confidence, data protection & harassment

Croydon Borough Council v Dodsworth (2017) – Obtained injunction for claimant in breach of confidence.

Universal Tax Solutions Ltd v BBC (2017) – Successfully opposed claimant’s application for an emergency injunction on behalf of the BBC.

News International Voicemail Interception Compensation Scheme (2013-2014) – Independent Barrister to the Scheme representing applicants bringing claims for compensation for phone hacking under the scheme established by News International.

Allan v Mawer (2013) – Acted for defendant doctors in successful application to strike out claim under the Data Protection Act 1998.

Robertson v Rogers (2012) – Acted for defendant in application for harassment injunction.

Law firm v Employee (2012) – Emergency injunction obtained to restrict breach of confidence.

Mills v Associated Newspapers & News Group Newspapers (2007) – Acted for Heather Mills in her privacy and libel claims against the Daily Mail and The Sun.

A v B (2007) – Emergency privacy injunction obtained for the claimant against national newspaper.

A v B (2007) – Acted for claimant in privacy claim against a private individual. 

Media, reporting restrictions & production orders

West Midlands Police v BBC (2017) – Acted for the BBC in an application for a production order in relation to a programme entitled “Who Bombed Birmingham?”.

Commissioner of Police for the Metropolitan Police v BBC (2012) – Acted for the BBC in an application for a production order arising out of a Panorama programme entitled “Tabloid Hacks Exposed”.

Al-Alas (2012) – Acted for The Times in a successful application to lift reporting restrictions in family court proceedings.

W v M, S and a NHS Primary Care Trust [2011] 2 FLR 1143 – Acting for the Times in a successful application to lift reporting restrictions and a ‘non-contact’ injunction imposed by the Court of Protection.

Cases and News

702 2018

Who’s Who Legal

Who's Who Legal One Brick Court, Jane Phillips and Andrew Caldecott QC recognised as most highly regarded in defamation, media and entertainment by Who’s [...]

Publications and Seminars

Contributor to Arlidge, Eady & Smith on Contempt, 4th Edition, 2011

Co-author, with Kate Wilson, of the Libel and Slander and Malicious Falsehood chapters in Bullen & Leake & Jacob’s Precedents of Pleadings, 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th Editions

Formerly co-author, Atkin’s Court Forms on Evidence

Defamation Update, Protecting the Media Conference, October 2017

Defamation Update, Protecting the Media Conference, September 2016 

Qualifications

BA (Hons), Jurisprudence, University of Oxford (Worcester College)

Inner Temple Scholar, Entrance Award, Accommodation Scholarship and Bursary, 1988

Called to the Bar in the Isle of Man

Working French and Italian

Chair of Governors at the Henrietta Barnett School, 2011-2015

Privacy Notice

Name and contact details of the Data Controller

Jane Phillips
One Brick Court
Temple
London EC4Y 9BY
Tel: 020 7353 9945
Email: clerks@onebrickcourt.com

Individuals to whom this Privacy Notice applies
1. This notice applies to all those whose personal data I process in the course of my practice as a barrister. It applies to you if (a) you are an individual and I have been instructed to act on your behalf (that is, you are “my client”), (b) you are a person mentioned in my case papers whether because you work for or are otherwise connected with a company, organisation or public body which has instructed me to act on its behalf or because, for example, you are a witness or are referred to in documents with which I have been supplied, (c) you are my instructing solicitor, (d) another lawyer or professional involved in a case in which I am acting, or (e) a member, pupil or employee at One Brick Court. If you are my client, you will have received a copy of this Privacy Notice when I was first instructed on your behalf.

Collection, use and reasons for processing your personal information
2. What information I obtain, and why and how I use that information, varies with the source and type of information:

Personal information where I am acting for you
2.1. If you are my client, I collect and store your personal details, other information that you have provided to me or your solicitor in connection with your case, and information about you contained in documents provided by others involved in the case, such as witnesses and opposing parties. This information may be obtained upon receipt of instructions, receipt of documents sent by your solicitor or other lawyers involved your case, or from you directly.

Personal information of individuals who are not my client
2.2. If you are not my client, you should know that I collect and store the names, employment details and contact details of third parties with whom I deal in the course of my practice, and the personal data of individuals contained in instructions, case papers and communications in cases in which I am instructed. This information may be obtained upon receipt of instructions, upon enquiries being made about my services, through dealings with third parties concerned with my work, from you directly or from enquiries being made by me about you, your work or your services.

2.3. If you are a member of Chambers, a pupil or employee at One Brick Court, I collect, store and use your name, contact details, work done by you (if you are a pupil), and other information about you that may be contained in Chambers internal documents or that you provide to me yourself.

3. The purposes for which I process the above personal data are the provision of legal services, the administration of my practice (including my membership of One Brick Court), legal research, practice development and marketing, training and assessing pupils, training mini-pupils and work experience students, and dealing with any complaints or disputes. The processing of the above personal data is necessary for those legitimate interests. Where I process your personal data for those legitimate interests, I have taken into account your data rights and considered that they do not override my interests in relation to the data I hold and the use I make of those data.

4. I lawfully process some of the above personal data in order to be able to comply with my legal obligations, for example dealings with HMRC.

5. If your personal data reveal your racial or ethnic origin, your political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or your trade union membership, data concerning your health or data concerning your sex life or sexual orientation, or data relating to your criminal convictions and offences or related security measures, I will only process those data where you have given your explicit consent, where the processing relates to personal data which are manifestly made public by you, where the processing is necessary for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims, or where the processing is otherwise permitted by law.

6. I will retain your personal data for so long as is necessary for the purposes identified above. This may vary depending on the context in which I acquired the data and the purpose for which I process those data, and, in the event of any sort of dispute for as long as is necessary to resolve it.

Security of your personal information
7. I take appropriate technical and organisational measures to prevent the loss, misuse or alteration of personal information.

Sharing your personal data
8. I may disclose your personal data to third parties where it is reasonably necessary to carry out any of the purposes set out above in this Notice.

Your rights
9. You may at any time:

9.1 Ask for confirmation that I am processing your personal data and request a copy.
9.2 Request the rectification of your personal data or for your data to be completed if data are incomplete.
9.3 Request that I erase your personal data.
9.4 Request that I restrict the extent of my processing of your personal data.
9.5 Request receipt of the personal data you have provided for transmission to another data controller, or request that I provide those data directly to another data controller.
9.6 Object to my processing of your personal data.

10. I will need to verify your identity before I can comply with any request.

11. I may be entitled or obliged to refuse your request or objection. If I do so, I will give you my reasons.

12. You have a right to complain about my processing of your personal data, including how I have responded to any request you’ve made about how I use your personal data, to the Information Commissioner (www.ico.org.uk and/or 0303 123 1113) the Supervisory Authority of any EU Member State.