Ambrosiadou v Coward
No express order or penal notice binding third parties is justified or necessary as there is no evidence of a real risk of publication by third parties; the court will approve the settlement and final injunction without the disputed penal notice wording.
- Parties
- Claimant: Elena Ambrosiadou; Defendant: Martin Coward
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 25 January 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Application for Approval of Settlement and Final Injunction
- Outcome
- Application granted in part
- Legal Topics
- Injunctions, Third Party Orders, Quia Timet Relief, Contra Mundum Orders, Article 8 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Elena Ambrosiadou
Claimant
Martin Coward
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Approval of Settlement and Final Injunction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a final injunction restraining publication of private information should expressly bind third parties
- 2 Whether the court should approve the settlement order including terms affecting third parties
- 3 Whether there is sufficient evidence of risk to justify a quia timet order against third parties
Ratio Decidendi
No express order or penal notice binding third parties is justified or necessary as there is no evidence of a real risk of publication by third parties; the court will approve the settlement and final injunction without the disputed penal notice wording.
Court Disposition
Application granted in part
Orders
- Permission granted for reading of the Statement in Open Court in the annexed form
- Order approved in the form sought, save for omission of penal notice wording referencing third parties
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment