X Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Chief Inspector of Education, Children's Services and Skills & Anor

Peter Oldham KC (instructed by Evershed Southerland (International) LLP) for the Claimant Fiona Scolding KC (instructed by Ofsted Legal Services) for the First Defendant Jack Anderson (instructed by GLD) for the Second Defendant Hearing dates: 12 July 2023 ____________________

i) there is a significant public interest in publication of reports by public bodies, particularly when they are under a duty to publish;

iii) where� what is sought to be restrained is allegedly defamatory allegations, then the Court should have regard to the fact that, in private law cases, the principle in Bonnard v Perryman [1891] 2 Ch 269 would usually prevent the grant of an order to restrain publication of defamatory statements where the respondent contends that the proposed publication was defensible.

i) The factors on the other side of the scales are very weighty indeed. In particular, I take into account the public interest in HMCI complying with its statutory duty, the Article 10 rights of both HMCI in reporting the results of the inspection and the public in receiving that information, and the interest of employers, would-be apprentices and the local community in learning of HMCI's concerns.

ii) Publication will lead the S/S to consider whether to take action against X Ltd under the contract. But there is a range of actions open to the department and the ending of funding is a long way from being a certainty. The C will be able to make representations to the 2D when that stage is reached.