Hyper-injunctions in English law

Last updated

Hyper-injunctions in English law refer to a form of superinjunction that prevents discussion of a topic covered by a superinjunction with Members of Parliament, lawyers or journalists except for the person's own defence lawyers. [1] The term was coined by the Liberal Democrat John Hemming MP. [2]

See also

Related Research Articles

Injunction a legal order to stop doing something

An injunction is a legal and equitable remedy in the form of a special court order that compels a party to do or refrain from specific acts. "When a court employs the extraordinary remedy of injunction, it directs the conduct of a party, and does so with the backing of its full coercive powers." A party that fails to comply with an injunction faces criminal or civil penalties, including possible monetary sanctions and even imprisonment. They can also be charged with contempt of court. Counterinjunctions are injunctions that stop or reverse the enforcement of another injunction.

Equity (law) Set of legal principles supplementing but distinct from the Common Law

In jurisdictions following the English common law system, equity is the body of law which was developed in the English Court of Chancery and which is now administered concurrently with the common law. In common law jurisdictions, the word "equity" "is not a synonym for 'general fairness' or 'natural justice'", but refers to "a particular body of rules that originated in a special system of courts."

Parliamentary privilege is a legal immunity enjoyed by members of certain legislatures, in which legislators are granted protection against civil or criminal liability for actions done or statements made in the course of their legislative duties. It is common in countries whose constitutions are based on the Westminster system.

Streisand effect phenomenon that attempting to hide information attracts more attention to it

The Streisand effect is a social phenomenon that occurs when an attempt to hide, remove, or censor information has the unintended consequence of further publicizing that information, often via the Internet. It is named after American entertainer Barbra Streisand, whose attempt to suppress the California Coastal Records Project's photograph of her residence in Malibu, California, taken to document California coastal erosion, inadvertently drew further attention to it in 2003.

Mosley v United Kingdom [2011] 53 E.H.R.R. 30; was a 2011 decision in the European Court of Human Rights regarding the right to privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. An application to the court was made by Max Mosley, former president of the FIA following his successful breach of confidence legal case against the News of the World. In the case the court unanimously rejected the proposition that Article 8 required member states to legislate to prevent newspapers printing stories regarding individual's private lives without first warning the individuals concerned, instead holding that it fell within each state's margin of appreciation to determine whether to legislate on this matter.

Mark Stephens (solicitor) English solicitor

Mark Howard Stephens CBE is an English solicitor specialising in media law, intellectual property rights and human rights with the firm Howard Kennedy LLP. He is known for representing James Hewitt when allegations of his affair with Diana, Princess of Wales first emerged. In 2010, he represented Julian Assange, the founder of the whistleblower website, WikiLeaks, defending him against extradition to Sweden.

Sir Michael George Tugendhat, styled The Hon. Mr Justice Tugendhat, and called in legal reports Tugendhat J, is a High Court judge in England and Wales. He is the High Court's senior media judge, taking over that role from Mr Justice Eady on 1 October 2010. His appointment was welcomed by some journalists who believed he held "more enlightened beliefs" than his predecessor.

The British privacy injunctions controversy began in early 2011, when London-based tabloid newspapers published stories about anonymous celebrities that were intended to flout what are commonly known in English law as super-injunctions, where the claimant could not be named, and carefully omitting details that could not legally be published. In April and May 2011, users of non-UK hosted websites, including the social media website Twitter, began posting material connecting various British celebrities with injunctions relating to a variety of potentially scandalous activities. Details of the alleged activities by those who had taken out the gagging orders were also published in the foreign press, as well as in Scotland, where the injunctions had no legal force.

<i>CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd</i>

CTB v News Group Newspapers is an English legal case between Manchester United player Ryan Giggs, given the pseudonym CTB, and defendants News Group Newspapers Limited and model Imogen Thomas.

<i>MJN v News Group Newspapers Ltd</i>

MJN v News Group Newspapers [2011] EWHC 1192 was a 2011 privacy case in English law decided by the High Court of Justice, in which a Premiership footballer obtained an injunction to prevent the publication of the details of an extra-marital affair which the footballer is alleged to have had with the lingerie model Kimberley West.

<i>NEJ v Wood</i>

NEJ v BDZ ([2011] EWHC 1972 is a 2011 High Court case involving issues of privacy in English law.

<i>BBC v HarperCollins Publishers Ltd</i>

BBC v Harper Collins (2010) EWHC 2424 was a 2010 case in English law, in which the BBC applied for an injunction to prevent HarperCollins publishing a book by Ben Collins, which was to reveal his identity as the racing driver known as 'The Stig' on the BBC's Top Gear programme.

In English tort law, a super-injunction is a type of injunction that prevents publication of information that is in issue and also prevents the reporting of the fact that the injunction exists at all. The term was coined by a Guardian journalist covering the Trafigura controversy. Due to their very nature media organisations are not able to report who has obtained a super-injunction without being in contempt of court. The term super-injunction has sometimes been used imprecisely in the media to refer to any anonymised privacy injunction preventing publication of private information. Critics of super-injunctions have argued that they stifle free speech, that they are ineffective as they can be breached using the Internet and social media and that the taking out of an injunction can have the unintended consequence of publicising the information more widely, a phenomenon known as the Streisand effect.

WER v REW was an anonymised legal case in which Chris Hutcheson, represented by Hugh Tomlinson, QC, of Schillings, took out an injunction to prevent Popdog Ltd from publishing details regarding his private life, and was heard before Justice Sir Charles Grey in January 2009. Hutcheson – Gordon Ramsay's former business partner and father-in-law – gained an injunction but it was later partially lifted, and ultimately overturned in the Court of Appeal, with Hutcheson being publicly named by the judge.

Injunctions in English law are a legal remedy of three types. Prohibitory injunctions prevent an individual or group from beginning or continuing actions which threaten or breach the legal rights of another. Mandatory injunctions are rarer and compel a person to carry out a certain act such as make restitution to an injured party. Freezing injunctions relate to funds such as bank accounts and are commonly Mareva Injunctions which are sought mainly in fraud, breach of trust and confiscatory proceedings. Injunctions are most common in cases involving significant matters of nuisance, privacy and libel ; they are relatively common remedies in major employment/agency/distribution, trust and property disputes, especially interim, interlocutory injunctions pending settlement or final hearing, whichever is the earlier where there is a clear and present danger that the matter in dispute between the parties will be wholly frustrated if the injunction is not imposed. A final hearing only may impose a final injunction which may be equivalent to undertakings given in a legally binding settlement document.

In English law an anonymised injunction is, according to the Neuberger Committee, "an interim injunction which restrains a person from publishing information which concerns the applicant and is said to be confidential or private where the names of either or both of the parties to the proceedings are not stated". An anonymised injunction is distinct from a "superinjunction" which also prevents publication that the injunction has been obtained. When reported, anonymised injunctions have case names which hide the identity of one or more parties, for example PJS v News Group Newspapers.

MNB v News Group Newspapers also known as Goodwin v News Group Newspapers is an English privacy law case in which then banker Fred Goodwin successfully applied for a temporary injunction to prevent The Sun from publishing details about his private life. The injunction was breached by John Hemming MP in the House of Commons where the case was inaccurately referred to as a super-injunction.

NMC v Persons Unknown is a 2009 English legal case in which a super-injunction was obtained. The case is cited as an example of a super-injunction in Laura Scaife's Handbook of Social Media Law.

JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 42 is a 2011 privacy case in the United Kingdom. The case relates to a story that The Sun newspaper wished to publish relating to an alleged affair between the claimant JIH and another person. An anonymity order was granted. The Guardian newspaper state that the individual who sought the injunction in this case is a sportsman.

TSE and ELP v News Group Newspapers [2011] EWHC 1308 is an English privacy case involving a footballer's private life. In this case an injunction was sought to prevent publication of details that would identify the claimant as having had a sexual relationship with another individual.

References

  1. Dowling, Tim (2011-03-21). "Got secrets you want to keep? Get a hyper-injunction". The Guardian.
  2. "House of Commons Hansard Debates for 17 Mar 2011 (pt 0001)".