The latest cases in the Crown Court and Court of Appeal are available on the Sky News Courts YouTube channel. These videos are an opportunity to see justice in action.
Section 41 of the Criminal Justice Act 1925 (CJA 1925) makes it an offence to take any photograph, make or attempt to make any portrait or sketch of a justice or a witness in, or a party to, any proceedings before the court, either in the courtroom or its precincts.
The Crimes and Courts Act 2013 allows the ban to be disapplied in certain circumstances by secondary legislation. For instance, the Court of Appeal and Competition Appeal Tribunal can broadcast proceedings. The Crown court can broadcast sentencing remarks. The Supreme Court is excluded from the two bans because cases heard by the UK’s highest court, which was established in 2009, would have previously been heard in the House of Lords where broadcasting was allowed.
Lady Chief Justice gives judgment in the Court of Appeal – Shamima Begum
High Court Judge Mr Justice Goss imposed life sentences with whole-life orders – Lucy Letby
Latest Court Proceedings Videos
Please be advised that videos may contain graphic descriptions of serious crimes, including murder and sexual offences.
Palestine Action ban is lawful, Court of Appeal rules
The government's proscription of Palestine Action as a terror organisation is lawful, the Court of Appeal ruled.
Five of the most senior judges in the country overturned an earlier decision from ...the High Court that the ban had breached the right to protest and had been incorrectly taken by ministers.
The proscription made it a criminal offence to belong to or support Palestine Action, punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
Handing down their ruling, which followed an earlier two-day hearing, the appeal judges said the ban had been "justified and proportionate".
Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr and four other judges said that the government's policy on banning terrorism groups meant the home secretary had been legally entitled to decide the group should be proscribed.
She said the judges recognised the proscription of an organisation like Palestine Acton was "highly controversial" and that it was supported by "many otherwise lawful citizens".
But Baroness Carr added that it was "a fundamental mistake to overlook the fact that Palestine Action overtly promotes unlawful violence amounting to terrorism".
"It is not - as claimed - a direct action civil disobedience protest group like the suffragettes, operating transparently in the open," she added.
"It is a covert organisation which operates with secret cells to avoid the detection and prosecution of those using violence to destroy property and cause injury."
She said the group had neither disowned nor condemned three incidents which took place before the ban was implemented and were judged by ministers to amount to terrorism.
The threats posed by Palestine Action had been the most important factor in the lawful decision-making, Baroness Carr said, including how the group clandestinely organised and targeted lawful businesses.
That included defence firms involved in UK national defence and assisting Ukraine. The home secretary had been best placed to judge the impact of those threats, said the court.
Ammori had challenged the ban on the argument that the-then Home Secretary Yvette Cooper had not followed her own internal rules - and that the ban also amounted to a serious interference with the right to protest.
The High Court decided the home secretary's policy on bans was designed to limit her discretion - but the government appealed that, saying she had been entitled to take into account the benefits of targeting and curtailing the group with terrorism legislation.
The Court of Appeal agreed, adding that the government was generally better placed than the courts in deciding matters of national security. While the court was the ultimate arbiter, judges had to recognise that ministers must have a wide margin within which to act in this complex field.
Palestine Action ban is lawful, Court of Appeal rules
The government's proscription of Palestine Action as a terror ...
The government's proscription of Palestine Action as a terror organisation is lawful, the Court of Appeal ruled.
Five of the most senior judges in the country overturned an earlier decision from ...the High Court that the ban had breached the right to protest and had been incorrectly taken by ministers.
The proscription made it a criminal offence to belong to or support Palestine Action, punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
Handing down their ruling, which followed an earlier two-day hearing, the appeal judges said the ban had been "justified and proportionate".
Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr and four other judges said that the government's policy on banning terrorism groups meant the home secretary had been legally entitled to decide the group should be proscribed.
She said the judges recognised the proscription of an organisation like Palestine Acton was "highly controversial" and that it was supported by "many otherwise lawful citizens".
But Baroness Carr added that it was "a fundamental mistake to overlook the fact that Palestine Action overtly promotes unlawful violence amounting to terrorism".
"It is not - as claimed - a direct action civil disobedience protest group like the suffragettes, operating transparently in the open," she added.
"It is a covert organisation which operates with secret cells to avoid the detection and prosecution of those using violence to destroy property and cause injury."
She said the group had neither disowned nor condemned three incidents which took place before the ban was implemented and were judged by ministers to amount to terrorism.
The threats posed by Palestine Action had been the most important factor in the lawful decision-making, Baroness Carr said, including how the group clandestinely organised and targeted lawful businesses.
That included defence firms involved in UK national defence and assisting Ukraine. The home secretary had been best placed to judge the impact of those threats, said the court.
Ammori had challenged the ban on the argument that the-then Home Secretary Yvette Cooper had not followed her own internal rules - and that the ban also amounted to a serious interference with the right to protest.
The High Court decided the home secretary's policy on bans was designed to limit her discretion - but the government appealed that, saying she had been entitled to take into account the benefits of targeting and curtailing the group with terrorism legislation.
The Court of Appeal agreed, adding that the government was generally better placed than the courts in deciding matters of national security. While the court was the ultimate arbiter, judges had to recognise that ministers must have a wide margin within which to act in this complex field.
IN FULL: Palestine Action activists jailed over factory raid
Four Palestine Action activists who caused £1.2m of damage at a UK ...
Four Palestine Action activists who caused £1.2m of damage at a UK site of an Israel-based defence firm were jailed.
Charlotte Head, 30, Samuel Corner, 23, Leona Kamio, 30, and Fatema ...Rajwani, 21, were convicted of criminal damage in a retrial after they broke into the Elbit Systems factory near Bristol in August 2024.
Corner was jailed for seven years and eight months for criminal damage and inflicting grievous bodily harm on a police sergeant.
The judge, Mr Justice Johnson, said Corner had had no justification for the "extreme and gratuitous force" used.
The case is believed to be the first time that convictions for criminal damage have been classified as being connected to terrorism. The judge said their actions had aimed to influence the government.
Head, who drove the prison van into the compound, was sentenced to five years in prison, Kamio was also handed a five-year jail term, and Rajwani received a prison sentence of four years and eight months.
The offenders will not qualify for early release from prison provisions and the Parole Board will assess their risk to the public when it determines when they can be set free.
All four will also serve an additional one year on a licence in the community at the end of their terms.
The judge said two of the activists had livestreamed the raid and posted the footage to social media, as part of an effort to "glorify criminality and vigilantism".
He added that they had been "reckless" about who would be injured and had been heavily involved in organising the raid with the right of veto over each part of the plan.
This video has been edited to remove extreme language.
Jail for Brit who encouraged US man's suicide online
A British man who encouraged a US citizen to kill themselves while on ...
A British man who encouraged a US citizen to kill themselves while on a video call was jailed for six years and four months.
Dylan Phelan, 21, pleaded guilty to intentionally ...doing an act that was capable of encouraging the suicide of another person.
In October 2024, Travis Dyer, 21, from Louisiana, took his own life during a call between the pair and two other men.
Phelan, from Morley, West Yorkshire, also admitted to three counts of possession of an extreme pornographic image and one count of making an indecent image of a child.
Passing sentence at Leeds Crown Court, the judge, Mr Justice Cotter, admonished him for indulging his “morbid curiosity” at the expense of Dyer’s wellbeing, saying the deceased had needed “help and support but he got the very opposite of that from you”.
He said: “You wanted to feel like you had control over the actions of another. You showed no respect for the life of Travis Dyer.”
This video has been edited to remove descriptions of suicide methods and extreme pornographic material.
Jail for rapist who let innocent man serve 17 years for his crimes
A sex attacker who violently beat and raped a woman in 2003 - in an ...
A sex attacker who violently beat and raped a woman in 2003 - in an attack that led to the wrongful conviction of another man who spent 17 years in ...prison - was given an extended sentence of 24 years.
Paul Quinn, now 52, evaded justice for more than two decades but was found guilty of two counts of rape, one count of choking with intent and one count of grievous bodily harm after new DNA technology linked him to the crime.
The victim, a then-mother-of-two who cannot be named for legal reasons, was walking along Cleggs Lane in Little Hulton, near Salford, in the early hours of 19 July 2003 when she was pushed down an embankment before being was beaten, raped and strangled by Quinn.
After an e-fit based on a description of the attacker was produced by police, Andrew Malkinson was picked out of a digital identity parade by the victim and two other witnesses - despite no DNA evidence linking him to the crime.
Mr Malkinson served 17 years behind bars for a crime he did not commit. Now aged 60, he was only released in 2020 after 17 years in jail, with his conviction finally quashed by the Court of Appeal in 2023.
Quinn always denied any involvement in the attack and was never linked to the crime until 2022 when new evidence emerged. nHe was convicted after a six-week trial at Manchester Crown Court.
During sentencing Mr Justice Bright, described Quinn's victim as a "hero", paying credit to her "quiet dignity" at having to give evidence in two trials.
He added: "She is a remarkable person, and I say all this to give public tribute her, and to others like her.
"They do not come here for vengeance, which we do not give them, they do not come expecting closure, which is a largely mythical phenomenon, especially after an event such as rape, they come because they want the truth to be heard and because they know it is the right thing to do.
"Without them it would not be possible to bring the guilty ones to justice - and this is why she, far above any of the police, or the lawyers or the DNA scientists is the hero of this story."
Turning his attention to Quinn, the judge said he had "seen no sign he has ever repented" for what he had done, adding he had instead "sat back and enjoyed your liberty at the expense of another man".
"Your stance remains that you deny committing the offences, that is by definition not a stance I accept, but it means as you appear before me today you appear apparently without remorse and without regret and you appear to have no readiness to tackle the causes, characteristics and circumstances that led to the offending," he said.
Sentencing him to 21 years in jail, with an extra three years on licence after release, Mr Justice Bright also addressed Quinn on Mr Malkinson's wrongful conviction.
“It is utterly clear that you knew throughout that another man had been arrested, charged, convicted and imprisoned," he told him.
"You knew that his conviction was wrongful. You also knew that it was extremely useful to you. It must have played on your conscience that another man was in prison, in effect, serving your sentence.
"It certainly should have played on your conscience that you were only too willing to sit back and take advantage of his misfortune.
"It is true that you never did anything positive to implicate Mr Malkinson, however but for your offending he never would have been questioned."
Killer who murdered partner and blew up her home jailed for at least 23 years
A killer who murdered his partner before blowing up their home in a ...
A killer who murdered his partner before blowing up their home in a gas explosion was jailed for at least 23 years.
Clifton George, 45, punched and tried to strangle mother-of-two ...Annabel Rook before stabbing her 31 times when she tried to end their 10-year relationship.
The 46-year-old was found dead in the family home in Stoke Newington, north London, in the early hours of 17 June 2025.
George admitted arson but denied murder, claiming he was only guilty of manslaughter because he had lost control. He was convicted of the more serious charge after a trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court.
The trial heard evidence that George was an aggressive and bullying partner who was prone to angry outbursts over trivial matters.
After killing Rook, he started a fire in the basement in order to cause a gas canister explosion which ripped through the house, causing around £400,000 of damage.
Imposing a life sentence with a minimum term of 23 years, Mr Justice Constable said George had the ability to be friendly and fun, but he had "another troubling side" to his character.
"An overwhelming picture has emerged of your rage, anger, and volatility", said the judge, adding that George had a "pronounced temper" which could be sparked by trivial matters and "perceived slights".
This video has been edited to comply with reporting restrictions.
UK Athletics fined £350,000 over death of Paralympian hit by falling metal cage
UK Athletics was fined £350,000 over the "wholly avoidable" death of a ...
UK Athletics was fined £350,000 over the "wholly avoidable" death of a Paralympian who was killed when a shot-put cage collapsed during training.
Abdullah Hayayei, 36, who represented the United Arab ...Emirates, was killed at Newham Leisure Centre, east London, during a practice session in 2017.
The father-of-five was preparing to represent his country in the F34 class discus, javelin and shot put at the World Para Athletics Championships in London when part of a 31st throwing cage fell on him.
He was left with a severe head injury after the 5ft high cage toppled over because it was put up incorrectly and without its base plate, in an "accident waiting to happen".
The national governing body for athletics was charged with causing the death of Mr Hayayei by "supplying for use... a discus/shot put cage which it used and operated without its base structure and which collapsed" into the Paralympian while he was practising shot putting.
UK Athletics Ltd admitted corporate manslaughter and was ordered to pay nearly £400,000 over six years - made up of a fine of £350,000 and legal costs of £44,000, as well as a statutory surcharge.
Keith Davies, who was the head of sport for the 2017 World Para Athletics Championships, also pleaded guilty to a health and safety charge.
The 79-year-old was handed a community order to do 175 hours of unpaid work, to be carried out in the next 12 months.
Sentencing, Judge Richard Marks KC said Mr Hayayei's death was "tragic, untimely and wholly avoidable".
He noted failings by UK Athletics were not a "one-off" but said any financial penalty would "weaken" its ability to support individual athletes and athletics in the community.
He told Davies, a retired PE teacher, that he knew, or ought to have known, base plates were an "integral part" of the cage construction.
He was "on notice" following an earlier collapse of an identical cage, the judge said, adding: "This was an accident which sooner or later was waiting to happen."
In the five years since UK Athletics acquired two identical cages originally used in the 2012 Olympics, they had never been properly assembled with the base plates attached, the court heard.
Davies had claimed UK Athletics had never been supplied with base plates, but this proved not to be true, the court was told.
Dom Watts founded the Ministry of Injustice in July 2021. Dom is an IT Professional with 30+ years experience in Tier 1 Banking, Government, Defence, Healthcare and Global Blue Chips. Dom has no legal training and is not a lawyer but has previously consulted for a Magic Circle Law Firm. You can find Dom on X or Google.
Section 4a of The Limitation Act 1980 defines the time limit for actions for defamation or malicious falsehood as one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.
Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the right to freedom of expression. "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."
“A key issue here is the need to distinguish between conduct which, however objectionable, does not justify invoking the criminal law and conduct which crosses the line and results in criminal liability" - Para 31 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]
“Harassment is generally understood to involve improper oppressive and unreasonable conduct that is targeted at an individual and calculated to produce alarm and distress” - Para 38 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]
"The behaviour said to amount to harassment must reach a level of seriousness passing beyond irritations, annoyances....The gravity of the misconduct must be of an order which would sustain criminal liability" - Paras [40-44] Hayden v Dickenson [2020] EWHC 3291 (QB)
"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything"
In 2002 Dom Watts was an unlikely consumer champion. The dad of three from Croydon took on the power and might of Kodak – and won...Dom on BBC Working Lunch
The provision of judges’ lodgings is a longstanding feature of… Read more: What are Judges Lodgings ?
The BBC describes so-called “two-tier policing” as where right-wing protests… Read more: What is Two Tier Policing ?
Handcuffs are a standard restraint tool used by police officers… Read more: Lawful Use of Handcuffs by the Police
Judge Nicholas Edward Rowland, known as His Honour Judge Nicholas… Read more: His Honour Judge Nicholas Rowland
The police barred and advisory lists, which are managed by… Read more: Police Barred and Advisory Lists
The President of the Family Division is a highly esteemed… Read more: President of the Family Division
Crimestoppers is widely promoted as the United Kingdom’s leading provider… Read more: Is Crimestoppers Anonymous ?
In magistrates’ courts across England and Wales, lay justices (magistrates… Read more: What is a Court Legal Adviser ?
A skeleton argument is a concise written document prepared by… Read more: What is a Skeleton Argument ?
His Honour Judge Martin John Cook was for sale, in… Read more: Can you Buy a Judge ?
Norwich Pharmacal orders (NPOs) are a form of court-ordered disclosure… Read more: Norwich Pharmacal Orders and Dodgy Fire Sticks
A statutory instrument is the most common form of secondary… Read more: What is a Statutory Instrument ?