BBG v Persons Unknown [2023] EWHC 2355 (KB) (22 September 2023)

BBG v Persons Unknown [2023] EWHC 2355 (KB) (22 September 2023)

The court granted the interim injunction because the Claimant demonstrated a real and imminent risk of irreparable harm from blackmail and harassment, the information at issue was plainly private and confidential, and the balance of convenience strongly favoured protection. Notice to the Defendants would defeat the object of the application. The Claimant was likely to succeed at trial on both misuse of private information and harassment. Anonymity, reporting restrictions, alternative service, and service out of jurisdiction were justified and necessary.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 2355 (KB)
Parties
Intended Claimant/applicant: BBG; Intended Defendants/respondents: Persons Unknown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 September 2023
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application (without Notice) / Interim Relief, Pre Trial
Outcome
Interim injunction granted
Legal Topics
Misuse of Private Information, Harassment, Blackmail, Interim Injunctions, Anonymity Orders, Alternative Service, Service Out of Jurisdiction
Privacy Law Media Law Civil Procedure Misuse of Private Information Harassment Blackmail Interim Injunctions Anonymity Orders +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 10 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BBG

Intended Claimant/applicant

Persons Unknown

Intended Defendants/respondents

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application (without Notice) / Interim Relief, Pre Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim injunction should be granted to restrain disclosure of private information and harassment by blackmail
  2. 2 Whether the hearing and proceedings should be anonymised and held in private
  3. 3 Whether alternative service and service out of jurisdiction should be permitted

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted the interim injunction because the Claimant demonstrated a real and imminent risk of irreparable harm from blackmail and harassment, the information at issue was plainly private and confidential, and the balance of convenience strongly favoured protection. Notice to the Defendants would defeat the object of the application. The Claimant was likely to succeed at trial on both misuse of private information and harassment. Anonymity, reporting restrictions, alternative service, and service out of jurisdiction were justified and necessary.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted

Orders

  • Defendants restrained from contacting the Claimant or those linked to him
  • Defendants restrained from using, publishing, communicating, or disclosing the confidential information as defined in Confidential Schedule A