LJY v Person(s) Unkown [2017] EWHC 3230 (QB) (11 December 2017)

LJY v Person(s) Unkown [2017] EWHC 3230 (QB) (11 December 2017)

The court found that the claimant was likely to succeed in establishing that the threatened publication would constitute harassment, misuse of private information, and defamation. The evidence indicated the letter was a generic blackmail attempt with no credible basis for the allegations. The balance of rights under Articles 8 and 10 of the ECHR, the need to prevent crime, and the lack of any credible defence justified the grant of an interim injunction restraining publication by persons unknown.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 3230
Parties
Claimant: LJY; Defendant(s): Persons Unknown responsible for the demand for money contained in a letter received by the claimant's representatives on 5 December 2017
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Interim Relief Granted Without Notice
Outcome
Interim injunction granted
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Blackmail, Harassment, Misuse of Private Information, Defamation, Service on Persons Unknown, Reporting Restrictions
Civil Procedure Media Law Privacy Law Tort Law Interim Injunctions Blackmail Harassment Misuse of Private Information +3 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 6 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LJY

Claimant

Persons Unknown responsible for the demand for money contained in a letter received by the claimant's representatives on 5 December 2017

Defendant(s)

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Interim Relief Granted Without Notice

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim injunction should be granted to restrain publication of allegations of serious criminal misconduct against the claimant by persons unknown, alleged to be blackmailers.
  2. 2 Whether the threatened publication constitutes harassment, misuse of private information, and/or defamation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimant was likely to succeed in establishing that the threatened publication would constitute harassment, misuse of private information, and defamation. The evidence indicated the letter was a generic blackmail attempt with no credible basis for the allegations. The balance of rights under Articles 8 and 10 of the ECHR, the need to prevent crime, and the lack of any credible defence justified the grant of an interim injunction restraining publication by persons unknown.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted

Orders

  • Defendants restrained from publishing or communicating the allegations of serious criminal misconduct against the claimant.
  • Defendants restrained from publishing any information liable to identify the claimant as a party to the proceedings or as the subject of the information.