WXY v Gewanter & Ors

WXY v Gewanter & Ors

The information published and threatened to be published by the Third Defendant was private and confidential, imparted in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence, and its disclosure was unauthorised. The public interest defence failed as the allegations were not from a reliable source and did not justify publication to the world at large. The conduct amounted to harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The Claimant's Article 8 rights outweighed the Third Defendant's Article 10 rights.

Parties
Claimant: WXY; First Defendant: Henry Gewanter; Second Defendant: Positive Profile Ltd; Third Defendant: Mark Burby
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment on Merits Against Third Defendant; Interim Injunctions Continued
Outcome
Judgment for the Claimant against the Third Defendant; interim injunctions continued
Legal Topics
Breach of Confidence, Misuse of Private Information, Protection From Harassment Act, Public Interest Defence, Freedom of Expression, Article 8 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR
Privacy Law Confidentiality Harassment Breach of Confidence Misuse of Private Information Protection From Harassment Act Public Interest Defence Freedom of Expression +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WXY

Claimant

Henry Gewanter

First Defendant

Positive Profile Ltd

Second Defendant

Mark Burby

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment on Merits Against Third Defendant; Interim Injunctions Continued

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the information published or threatened to be published was private or confidential and known to be such by the Third Defendant
  2. 2 Whether the Third Defendant published or threatened to publish private and confidential information
  3. 3 Whether publication or threatened publication can be justified in the public interest

Ratio Decidendi

The information published and threatened to be published by the Third Defendant was private and confidential, imparted in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence, and its disclosure was unauthorised. The public interest defence failed as the allegations were not from a reliable source and did not justify publication to the world at large. The conduct amounted to harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The Claimant's Article 8 rights outweighed the Third Defendant's Article 10 rights.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Claimant against the Third Defendant; interim injunctions continued

Orders

  • Permanent injunction restraining the Third Defendant from publishing or disclosing private or confidential information and from harassing the Claimant
  • Interim injunctions to remain in place pending further hearing on consequential orders