Advertising Standards Authority Ltd v Mitchell

Advertising Standards Authority Ltd v Mitchell

The court granted the interim injunction because the ASA was likely to establish at trial that the information was confidential and privileged, imparted under circumstances importing a duty of confidence, and at risk of misuse by the defendant. The court found jurisdiction over the defendant based on evidence of residence and presence in England and Wales, and concluded no compelling public interest justified breach of confidence. The order was tailored to preserve the position until a return date, with carve-outs to avoid inhibiting the defendant's dealings with the ASA or litigation about RBS.

Parties
Intended Claimant: Advertising Standards Authority Limited; Intended Defendant: Robert Neil Whyte Mitchell
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Pre Trial, Interim Relief
Outcome
Interim injunction granted in favour of the ASA.
Legal Topics
Breach of Confidence, Legal Professional Privilege, Freedom of Expression, Jurisdiction, Interim Injunctions
Civil Procedure Confidentiality Media Law Breach of Confidence Legal Professional Privilege Freedom of Expression Jurisdiction Interim Injunctions

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Advertising Standards Authority Limited

Intended Claimant

Robert Neil Whyte Mitchell

Intended Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Pre Trial, Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant an interim injunction restraining the use, publication, or disclosure of confidential and privileged information mistakenly sent to the defendant
  2. 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction over the defendant given domicile issues
  3. 3 Whether the threshold for pre-trial restraint of publication is met under Human Rights Act s.12

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted the interim injunction because the ASA was likely to establish at trial that the information was confidential and privileged, imparted under circumstances importing a duty of confidence, and at risk of misuse by the defendant. The court found jurisdiction over the defendant based on evidence of residence and presence in England and Wales, and concluded no compelling public interest justified breach of confidence. The order was tailored to preserve the position until a return date, with carve-outs to avoid inhibiting the defendant's dealings with the ASA or litigation about RBS.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted in favour of the ASA.

Orders

  • Defendant prohibited from using, publishing, communicating, or disclosing all or any part of the confidential email and attachments (except photograph), and any information derived from them, subject to carve-outs for ASA complaint and related litigation.
  • Defendant ordered to disclose what has been done with the email, attachments, and information contained therein.