header-logo header-logo

05 March 2025
Issue: 8107 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Privacy , Media
printer mail-detail

Calls for legislation on intimate image abuse

Possession of non-consensual intimate images (NCII) would become a criminal offence similar to that for child sexual abuse material, under proposals launched by a parliamentary committee.

The Women and Equalities Committee called on the government this week to amend the Crime and Policing Bill currently going through Parliament in order to create the offence. It warned this is necessary to force online platforms to delete the images—according to the Revenge Porn Helpline, about 10% of NCII are not removed and continue to be accessible in the UK, often hosted on sites based overseas including some dedicated to NCII abuse.

Currently, the Online Safety Act 2023 creates criminal offences related to the making and sharing of NCII. It gives Ofcom powers to impose fines and order services to take material down.

However, Ofcom’s powers are slow, says Sarah Owen MP, the committee’s chair, and ‘a legal gap remains. NCII can circulate online years after the image was first posted’.

As well as criminalising possession, the committee’s report, ‘Tackling non-consensual intimate image abuse’, published this week, calls for the establishment of an Online Safety Commission. This would be a statutory body akin to the eSafety Commission in Australia, with a focus on support for individuals. The commission would act on behalf of individuals who report NCII content, applying for and sending court orders demanding websites take down content or requiring perpetrators to pay compensation for harm caused.

Owen said: ‘The committee heard shocking evidence of [NCII’s] scale and impact, with a tenfold increase in just four years and more than 22,000 reported cases in 2024.

‘There is also an urgent need for courts to confiscate devices storing NCII content. There have been cases where, following the criminal justice process, perpetrators have had devices containing the NCII returned to them. This is harrowing for victims.’ 

Issue: 8107 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Privacy , Media
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll