SOJ v JAO [2019] EWHC 2569 (QB) (04 October 2019)

SOJ v JAO [2019] EWHC 2569 (QB) (04 October 2019)

The court granted an interim injunction restraining publication of confidential information because the claimant was likely to succeed at trial in enforcing the confidentiality agreement, there was no public interest in publication, the agreement was freely entered into with legal advice, there was credible evidence of threatened breach and blackmail, and damages would not be an adequate remedy. The application was properly heard without notice and in private to prevent the threatened disclosure and secure the proper administration of justice.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2569 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: SOJ; Defendant: JAO
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Without Notice, Pre Trial, Interim Relief
Outcome
Interim injunction granted pending inter partes hearing
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Confidentiality Agreements, Blackmail, GDPR, Article 8 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR, Settlement Agreements, Anonymity Orders
Privacy Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Interim Injunctions Confidentiality Agreements Blackmail GDPR Article 8 ECHR +3 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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SOJ

Claimant

JAO

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Without Notice, Pre Trial, Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim injunction should be granted to restrain publication of confidential information relating to a private relationship and settlement agreement
  2. 2 Whether the application should be heard without notice and in private
  3. 3 Whether the contractual confidentiality agreement is enforceable

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted an interim injunction restraining publication of confidential information because the claimant was likely to succeed at trial in enforcing the confidentiality agreement, there was no public interest in publication, the agreement was freely entered into with legal advice, there was credible evidence of threatened breach and blackmail, and damages would not be an adequate remedy. The application was properly heard without notice and in private to prevent the threatened disclosure and secure the proper administration of justice.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted pending inter partes hearing

Orders

  • The defendant is restrained from publishing, disclosing, or using the confidential information identified in the order anywhere in the world.
  • Anonymity order for both parties continued.