AG v Jonathan Cape [1976] QB 752
PUBLIC POLICY – DIARY OF FORMER CABINET MINISTER– COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY – INJUNCTION TO RESTRAIN PUBLICATION
Facts
Between 1964 and 1970 a Cabinet Minister, with the knowledge of his Cabinet colleagues, kept a diary recording Cabinet discussions and political events with a view to their publication as a book. Following his death in April 1974, volume one was sent to the Secretary of the Cabinet for his approval but was rejected on the ground that publication was against the public interest in that the doctrine of collective responsibility would be harmed by the disclosure of details of Cabinet discussions. In January 1975, the first extracts from the book were published in the “Sunday Times” without the consent of the Secretary of the Cabinet. The Attorney-General applied for injunctions against the publishers to restrain publication of the book in the public interest.
Issues
The principal issue which fell to be resolved was whether the constitutional convention of collective responsibility would be violated by the publication of confidential discussions disclosed in private by Cabinet Ministers, particularly where a significant amount of time had elapsed between the discussions themselves and the point at which they would be made public.
Decision/Outcome
The court held, refusing the applications, that the doctrine of collective responsibility could be prejudiced by disclosure of information given in confidence and that the court had the power to restrain such disclosure. However, in the present case the public interest did not require such restraint by the court as ten years had elapsed since the events recorded and the disclosure of such events would not prejudice the future operation of collective responsibility or inhibit free discussion in Cabinet. Moreover, there was no power in the court to restrain disclosure of advice given by civil servants or of opinions expressed as to the ability of such civil servants.
Updated 21 March 2026
This case summary accurately reflects the decision in Attorney-General v Jonathan Cape Ltd [1976] QB 752. The case remains good law and is still cited as the leading authority establishing that the courts can, in principle, grant injunctions to restrain breach of Cabinet confidentiality on public interest grounds, even where the information is not a conventional trade secret. The underlying legal principles — that equity will protect confidential information imparted in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence, and that collective Cabinet responsibility may in appropriate cases found such a claim — remain valid.
Readers should note, however, that subsequent developments are relevant to the broader context. The law of breach of confidence has been significantly developed since 1976, most notably through the Human Rights Act 1998 and cases such as Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] UKHL 22, which introduced a parallel cause of action in misuse of private information requiring courts to balance Article 8 (right to privacy) against Article 10 (freedom of expression) rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. These developments do not disturb the Jonathan Cape principles but sit alongside them. Additionally, the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 and the Cabinet Manual (published 2011) now provide a more formalised framework for the conduct of Cabinet government, though they do not alter the legal principles established in this case. The summary does not address these later developments, but as a case note focused on the 1976 decision itself, it remains accurate.
