Contostavlos v Mendahun [2012] EWHC 850 (QB) (29 March 2012)

Contostavlos v Mendahun [2012] EWHC 850 (QB) (29 March 2012)

The claimant is likely to establish at trial that she has a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of the sexual video/images and that publication should not be allowed; therefore, the non-disclosure order should be continued.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 850 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Tulisa Contostavlos; First Defendant: Michael Mendahun; Second Defendant: Any person in possession or control of the material referred to in Schedule 2 of the Order of Mr Justice Tugendhat dated 20 March 2012; Third Defendant: Justin Edwards
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Privacy Injunction Application / Interim Application for Continuation of Non Disclosure Order
Outcome
Non-disclosure order continued until trial or further order.
Legal Topics
Non Disclosure Orders, Reasonable Expectation of Privacy, Sexual Images, Interim Injunctions
Privacy Law Media Law Non Disclosure Orders Reasonable Expectation of Privacy Sexual Images 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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tulisa Contostavlos

Claimant

Michael Mendahun

First Defendant

Any person in possession or control of the material referred to in Schedule 2 of the Order of Mr Justice Tugendhat dated 20 March 2012

Second Defendant

Justin Edwards

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Privacy Injunction Application / Interim Application for Continuation of Non Disclosure Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to a continuation of a non-disclosure order restraining publication of sexual images
  2. 2 Whether the claimant has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the material

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant is likely to establish at trial that she has a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of the sexual video/images and that publication should not be allowed; therefore, the non-disclosure order should be continued.

Court Disposition

Non-disclosure order continued until trial or further order.

Orders

  • Prohibition on publication or disclosure of any film or video of the claimant engaged in a sexual act or any part thereof or stills therefrom.
  • Access to documents limited.