Or even breaking wind.
There is, on the other hand, the little question of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the salient part of which reads, "Everyone has 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."
That has Constitutional status, superior to National Law, let alone Council ByeLaws.
The enacting legislation, The Humans Rights Act 1998, contains the following provisions:

Article 3 Interpretation of legislation.
   (1)So far as it is possible to do so, primary legislation and subordinate legislation must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights.
   (2)This section—
       (a)applies to primary legislation and subordinate legislation whenever enacted;
...
6 Acts of public authorities.
   (1)It is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right.
   (2)Subsection (1) does not apply to an act if—
      (a)as the result of one or more provisions of primary legislation, the authority could not have acted differently; or
      (b)in the case of one or more provisions of, or made under, primary legislation which cannot be read or given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights, the authority was acting so as to give effect to or enforce those provisions.
   (3)In this section "public authority" includes—
      (a)a court or tribunal, and
      (b)any person certain of whose functions are functions of a public nature,
    but does not include either House of Parliament or a person exercising functions in connection with proceedings in Parliament.
...
   (6)"An act" includes a failure to act but does not include a failure to—
      (a)introduce in, or lay before, Parliament a proposal for legislation; or
      (b)make any primary legislation or remedial order.

Article 7 contains details about time limits and ways of going about complaining. It's too long to post here, click the link. Perhaps CSH should step in. It's worth reading the next Articles too

We now come to the num of the matter:

Article 12 Freedom of expression.
   (1)This section applies if a court is considering whether to grant any relief which, if granted, might affect the exercise of the Convention right to freedom of expression.
   (2)If the person against whom the application for relief is made ("the respondent") is neither present nor represented, no such relief is to be granted unless the court is satisfied—
      (a)that the applicant has taken all practicable steps to notify the respondent; or
      (b)that there are compelling reasons why the respondent should not be notified.
   (3)No such relief is to be granted so as to restrain publication before trial unless the court is satisfied that the applicant is likely to establish that publication should not be allowed.
   (4)The court must have particular regard to the importance of the Convention right to freedom of expression and, where the proceedings relate to material which the respondent claims, or which appears to the court, to be journalistic, literary or artistic material (or to conduct connected with such material), to—
      (a)the extent to which—
         (i)the material has, or is about to, become available to the public; or
         (ii)it is, or would be, in the public interest for the material to be published;
      (b)any relevant privacy code.
   (5)In this section—
      "court" includes a tribunal; and
      "relief" includes any remedy or order (other than in criminal proceedings).
...

This is primordial. "Relief" means the exact opposite of what you might think, it actually means "Law". Anyone who thinks they may be affected by this must write IMMEDIATELY to the Court drawing their attention to these provisions, taking it by hand to the Clerk of the Court and requiring him to sign a copy of the document as proof of receipt.