 | This article needs additional citations for verification .(July 2016) |
NMC v Persons Unknown is a 2009 English legal case in which a super-injunction was obtained. The details of the injunction are not publicly known. [1] The case is cited as an example of a super-injunction in Laura Scaife's Handbook of Social Media Law. [2]
An injunction is an 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.
Richard Mellon Scaife was an American billionaire, a principal heir to the Mellon banking, oil, and aluminum fortune, and the owner and publisher of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. In 2005, Scaife was number 238 on the Forbes 400, with a personal fortune of $1.2 billion. By 2013, Scaife had dropped to number 371 on the listing, with a personal fortune of $1.4 billion.
Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights is a European Union directive in the field of intellectual property law, made under the Single Market provisions of the Treaty of Rome. The directive covers civil remedies only—not criminal ones.
A civil gang injunction or CGI is a type of restraining order issued by courts in the United States prohibiting gang members in particular cities from participating in certain specified activities. It is based on the legal theory that gang activity constitutes a public nuisance that can prevent non–gang members of the community from enjoying peace and public order. An injunction is obtained against the gang itself, after which the police and district attorney may decide against whom they will enforce it. Law enforcement use gang injunctions as a tool to label people as gang members and restrict their activities in a defined area (ACLU).
Intellectual Reserve, Inc. v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry, Inc., 75 F. Supp. 2d 1290, was a United States district court decision on the subject of deep linking and contributory infringement of copyright.
Haywood v. National Basketball Association, 401 U.S. 1204 (1971), was a U.S. Supreme Court decision that ruled against the NBA's requirement that a player could not be drafted by an NBA team until four years after graduating from high school. Justice Douglas, in an in-chambers opinion, allowed Spencer Haywood to play in the NBA temporarily until the litigation could proceed further. The case was settled out of court, Haywood continued playing, and the NBA modified its four-year rule to allow players to enter the league early in cases of "hardship".
The Streisand effect is an unintended consequence of attempts to hide, remove, or censor information, where the effort instead increases public awareness of the information. The effect is named for American singer and actress Barbra Streisand, whose attorney's attempt in 2003 to suppress the publication of a photograph showing her clifftop residence in Malibu, taken to document coastal erosion in California, inadvertently drew far greater attention to the previously obscure photograph. The effect exemplifies psychological reactance, a kind of 'reverse psychology' effect, in which the attempt to hide information instead makes it more interesting to seek out and propagate.
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.
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.
Hugh Richard Edward Tomlinson KC is a barrister in England and Wales, an English translator of the philosopher Gilles Deleuze and a founding member of Matrix Chambers. He is a specialist in media and information law including defamation, confidence, privacy and data protection.
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 2006 Ivory Coast toxic waste dump controversy that had resulted in Trafigura obtaining a controversial injunction. Due to their very nature media organisations are not able to report who has obtained a super-injunction without being in contempt of court.
DFT v TFD [2010] EWHC 2335 (QB) is an English privacy case which concerned an attempt by a woman to blackmail an individual by revealing details of a sexual relationship the couple had had unless a substantial bribe was paid. A super-injunction was initially granted in the case but later discontinued.
RJW v Guardian News and Media Limited, also known as Trafigura v Guardian News and Media Limited and the Trafigura case, was a 2009 legal action in which Trafigura attempted to use a super-injunction to prevent the press reporting details of toxic waste dumping in the Ivory Coast. A landmark case in UK privacy law, the case brought these types of injunction under scrutiny and caused government concern about the injunctions and how they are used. The injunction was released on The Guardian after Paul Farrelly MP brought up the topic during Parliamentary Questions and the publication of the report on WikiLeaks.
WER v REW was an anonymised legal case in which Chris Hutcheson, represented by Hugh Tomlinson, 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.
PJS v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2016] UKSC 26 is a UK constitutional law case in which an anonymised privacy injunction was obtained by a claimant, identified in court documents as "PJS", to prohibit publication of the details of a sexual encounter between him and two other people. Media outside England and Wales identified PJS as David Furnish.
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.
Terry Alvin Doughty is the chief United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. He served as a judge on the Fifth Judicial District Court in Louisiana from 2009 to 2018.
Moody v. NetChoice, LLC and NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton, 603 U.S. ___ (2024), were United States Supreme Court cases related to protected speech under the First Amendment and content moderation by interactive service providers on the Internet under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Moody and Paxton were challenges to two state statutes – enacted in Florida and Texas, respectively – that sought to limit this moderation. In July 2024, the justices vacated the lower-court decisions in both cases due to both courts failing to perform a full First Amendment assessment of the laws, and remanded them for further consideration.
 | This article related to English law is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |