ERY v Associated Newspapers Ltd

ERY v Associated Newspapers Ltd

The Claimant is entitled to an interim injunction restraining the Defendant from publishing, communicating, or disclosing information concerning the police investigation into him, as he has a reasonable expectation of privacy in such information and the Defendant's Article 10 rights do not outweigh the Claimant's Article 8 rights in the circumstances. The Defendant's stated intention not to publish the fact of the interview under caution and willingness to give 24 hours' notice is sufficient, but the risk of inferential reference to the Claimant in reporting on Company A justifies the injunction. The order must be precisely framed and omit the word 'using'.

Parties
Claimant: ERY; Defendant: Associated Newspapers Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interim Injunction Application; Post Hearing Judgment
Outcome
Interim injunction granted and extended, with modification.
Legal Topics
Quia Timet Injunctions, Misuse of Private Information, Freedom of Expression, Reasonable Expectation of Privacy, Public Interest, Defamation
Privacy Law Media Law Human Rights Quia Timet Injunctions Misuse of Private Information Freedom of Expression Reasonable Expectation of Privacy Public Interest +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 6 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ERY

Claimant

Associated Newspapers Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interim Injunction Application; Post Hearing Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant is entitled to an interim injunction restraining the Defendant from publishing information about a police investigation into him
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant has a reasonable expectation of privacy in information relating to a police investigation
  3. 3 Whether the Defendant's Article 10 rights to freedom of expression outweigh the Claimant's Article 8 privacy rights

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant is entitled to an interim injunction restraining the Defendant from publishing, communicating, or disclosing information concerning the police investigation into him, as he has a reasonable expectation of privacy in such information and the Defendant's Article 10 rights do not outweigh the Claimant's Article 8 rights in the circumstances. The Defendant's stated intention not to publish the fact of the interview under caution and willingness to give 24 hours' notice is sufficient, but the risk of inferential reference to the Claimant in reporting on Company A justifies the injunction. The order must be precisely framed and omit the word 'using'.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted and extended, with modification.

Orders

  • Defendant restrained from publishing, communicating, or disclosing information concerning the police investigation into the Claimant, except on 24 hours' notice to the Claimant or his solicitors.
  • Order to omit the word 'using'.