MJN v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2011] EWHC 1192 (QB) (11 May 2011)

MJN v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2011] EWHC 1192 (QB) (11 May 2011)

The claimant is likely to establish at trial a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information sought to be restrained, and there is no public interest justification for its publication. The balance of rights under Articles 8 and 10 ECHR strongly favours the claimant. The interim injunction should be continued,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 1192
Parties
Claimant: MJN; Defendant: News Group Newspapers Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Return Date Hearing for Continuation of Interim Injunction
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Reasonable Expectation of Privacy, Balancing Article 8 and Article 10 ECHR Rights, Prior Restraint, Open Justice, Anonymity Orders
Privacy Law Media Law Human Rights Interim Injunctions Reasonable Expectation of Privacy Balancing Article 8 and Article 10 ECHR Rights Prior Restraint Open Justice +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MJN

Claimant

News Group Newspapers Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Return Date Hearing for Continuation of Interim Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information sought to be restrained
  2. 2 Whether there is any public interest justification for publication of the information
  3. 3 Whether an interim injunction restraining publication should be continued

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant is likely to establish at trial a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information sought to be restrained, and there is no public interest justification for its publication. The balance of rights under Articles 8 and 10 ECHR strongly favours the claimant. The interim injunction should be continued, with a minor agreed variation, to prevent identification of the claimant and disclosure of sexual or salacious details.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Continuation of the interim injunction until trial or further order, with a variation to restrict publication of images only if they identify the claimant in the context of the relationship.
  • Order pursuant to CPR 31.22 restricting use and access to confidential schedules and documents by non-parties.