CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor

CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor

The claimant was likely to succeed at trial in obtaining a permanent injunction because he had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information, no legitimate public interest justified publication, and the Article 8 rights of the claimant and his family outweighed any Article 10 rights of the defendants. The evidence of blackmail further supported the need for protection.

Parties
Claimant: CTB; First Defendant: News Group Newspapers Limited; Second Defendant: Imogen Thomas
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Interim Injunction
Outcome
Interim injunction granted and continued
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Right to Privacy, Freedom of Expression, Blackmail, Public Domain, Balancing Article 8 and Article 10 Rights
Media Law Privacy Law Human Rights Interim Injunctions Right to Privacy Freedom of Expression Blackmail Public Domain +1 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 5 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CTB

Claimant

News Group Newspapers Limited

First Defendant

Imogen Thomas

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Interim Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to an interim injunction restraining publication of private information
  2. 2 Whether the claimant has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information sought to be published
  3. 3 Whether any countervailing Article 10 rights or public interest override the claimant's Article 8 rights

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant was likely to succeed at trial in obtaining a permanent injunction because he had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information, no legitimate public interest justified publication, and the Article 8 rights of the claimant and his family outweighed any Article 10 rights of the defendants. The evidence of blackmail further supported the need for protection.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted and continued

Orders

  • Publication of the claimant’s identity and subject-matter of proceedings is restricted to what is contained in the judgment and the order dated 21 April 2011.
  • The interim injunction restraining publication of private information is continued until trial or further order.