Ho v Bragg [2018] EWHC 214 (QB) (08 February 2018)

Ho v Bragg [2018] EWHC 214 (QB) (08 February 2018)

The applicant demonstrated, on the evidence, that it is more likely than not that publication of the confidential documents should not be allowed due to their private nature, lack of justification for disclosure, and the blackmail element. The requirements of s.12 Human Rights Act 1998 were satisfied, including compelling reasons for granting relief without full notice to the respondent.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 214
Parties
Applicant: Faye Clementina Ho; Respondent: Adam Bragg
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Interim Application Prior to Claim Form Issuance; Return Date Set
Outcome
Interim injunction granted pending return date
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Non Disclosure Orders, Blackmail, Confidential Information, Human Rights Act 1998 S.12
Civil Procedure Media Law Privacy Law Interim Injunctions Non Disclosure Orders Blackmail Confidential Information Human Rights Act 1998 S.12

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Faye Clementina Ho

Applicant

Adam Bragg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Interim Application Prior to Claim Form Issuance; Return Date Set

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim non-disclosure order should be granted without notice to the respondent
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is likely to establish at trial that publication of the documents should not be allowed
  3. 3 Whether the requirements of s.12 Human Rights Act 1998 are satisfied

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant demonstrated, on the evidence, that it is more likely than not that publication of the confidential documents should not be allowed due to their private nature, lack of justification for disclosure, and the blackmail element. The requirements of s.12 Human Rights Act 1998 were satisfied, including compelling reasons for granting relief without full notice to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted pending return date

Orders

  • Interim non-disclosure order restraining publication of the documents or their contents
  • Order for delivery up of the documents to the applicant's solicitors, with provision for respondent to receive copies for the purposes of proceedings upon written undertaking