A v B & C [2002] EWCA Civ 337 (11th March, 2002)

A v B & C [2002] EWCA Civ 337 (11th March, 2002)

The Court of Appeal held that the relationships between A and C and D, being transient and with the other parties willing to disclose, attracted only a modest degree of confidentiality. The injunction constituted an unjustified interference with freedom of the press under Article 10 ECHR. The balance of rights favored freedom of expression, and the injunction was set aside.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 337
Parties
Appellant: A; First Respondent: B; Second Respondent: C
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Interim Injunction in Breach of Confidence/privacy Action / Court of Appeal Judgment on Substantive and Procedural Appeals
Outcome
Appeal allowed; injunction set aside
Legal Topics
Breach of Confidence, Privacy, Freedom of Expression, Interim Injunctions, Human Rights Act 1998, Articles 8 and 10 ECHR
Civil Procedure Media Law Human Rights Breach of Confidence Privacy Freedom of Expression Interim Injunctions Human Rights Act 1998 +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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A

Appellant

B

First Respondent

C

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Interim Injunction in Breach of Confidence/privacy Action / Court of Appeal Judgment on Substantive and Procedural Appeals

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim injunction restraining publication of private information about a public figure's sexual relationships should be upheld
  2. 2 How to balance Article 8 (privacy) and Article 10 (freedom of expression) rights in the context of media publication
  3. 3 Whether the nature of the relationships and the wishes of the other parties affect the claimant's right to confidentiality

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the relationships between A and C and D, being transient and with the other parties willing to disclose, attracted only a modest degree of confidentiality. The injunction constituted an unjustified interference with freedom of the press under Article 10 ECHR. The balance of rights favored freedom of expression, and the injunction was set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; injunction set aside

Orders

  • Injunction set aside
  • Respondents to pay two-thirds of appellant's costs here and below