AXB v CYD

AXB v CYD

The claimant failed to meet the threshold under section 12(3) Human Rights Act 1998 and the rule in Bonnard v Perryman for interim injunctive relief in defamation, as the evidence is finely balanced and there is a real prospect the defendants' case may succeed. The court will not restrain publication of the alleged defamatory statements or grant relief for harassment. However, interim relief is granted in respect of misuse of private information, with a tightly drafted order prohibiting publication of the claimant's home address, telephone number, images of her child, or personal communications not already in the public domain. Undertakings offered by the second defendant and informally...

Parties
Claimant: AXB; First Defendant: CYD; Second Defendant: EYD; Third Defendant: FZG
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interim Application for Injunctive Relief
Outcome
Interim injunctive relief in defamation and harassment refused; interim relief granted for misuse of private information; anonymity and evidence restrictions ordered.
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Libel, Misuse of Private Information, Protection From Harassment Act, Freedom of Expression, Anonymity Orders
Defamation Privacy Harassment Media Law Interim Injunctions Libel Misuse of Private Information Protection From Harassment Act +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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AXB

Claimant

CYD

First Defendant

EYD

Second Defendant

FZG

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interim Application for Injunctive Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interim injunctive relief should be granted to restrain publication of alleged defamatory statements and private information
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is likely to establish at trial that publication should not be allowed under section 12(3) Human Rights Act 1998
  3. 3 Whether the rule in Bonnard v Perryman precludes interim relief in defamation

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to meet the threshold under section 12(3) Human Rights Act 1998 and the rule in Bonnard v Perryman for interim injunctive relief in defamation, as the evidence is finely balanced and there is a real prospect the defendants' case may succeed. The court will not restrain publication of the alleged defamatory statements or grant relief for harassment. However, interim relief is granted in respect of misuse of private information, with a tightly drafted order prohibiting publication of the claimant's home address, telephone number, images of her child, or personal communications not already in the public domain. Undertakings offered by the second defendant and informally...

Court Disposition

Interim injunctive relief in defamation and harassment refused; interim relief granted for misuse of private information; anonymity and evidence restrictions ordered.

Orders

  • No interim injunction restraining publication of alleged defamatory statements or harassment.
  • Order prohibiting the third defendant from publishing the claimant's home address, telephone number, images of her child, or personal communications not already in the public domain, save for litigation or legal advice.