A well-known person in the entertainment business breathed a sigh of relief last week as their extra-marital sexual activities were ordered to be kept under wraps.
The Supreme Court last week allowed an appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision to set aside an interim injunction preventing a newspaper from printing a tell-all piece from being printed, despite the disclosure on the internet of the name of the individual concerned and the individual’s spouse.
The Court of Appeal had earlier set aside the interim injunction, following the publication of accounts concerning the individual’s extramarital activities in the USA, Canada and Scotland.
The Court of Appeal reached a decision that the individual was not likely to obtain a permanent injunction to restrain the newspaper from publishing the information and that consequently the interim injunction should be set aside.
The Supreme Court held last week that even if private information had already been disclosed, the repetition of such disclosure (i.e. the proposed publication of the information by the newspaper) could constitute a further tort of invasion of privacy. It ruled that the Court of Appeal hadn’t given sufficient weight to the interests of the individual’s children. On that basis the appeal was allowed and the interim injunction continued.
This decision – while welcomed by privacy lawyers – will remain a frustration to the press.