GYH v Persons Unknown (Responsible for the Publication of Webpages)

GYH v Persons Unknown (Responsible for the Publication of Webpages)

The claimant established a strong prima facie case of harassment, misuse of private information, and defamation by persistent publication of false and intimate information online. The information is inherently private and sensitive, and the distress caused cannot be adequately compensated by damages. The claimant took all practicable steps to notify the defendant and third parties, and compelling reasons justified non-notification of platform providers. The court has jurisdiction and the balance of convenience favours granting an interim injunction restraining further harassment and publication, with appropriate exceptions and refinements to the order.

Parties
Claimant: GYH; Defendant: Persons Unknown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Harassment/privacy/defamation / Interim Application for Non Disclosure Order (injunction)
Outcome
Interim non-disclosure order (injunction) granted with modifications
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Misuse of Private Information, Protection From Harassment Act, Defamation, Anonymity Orders, Service on Persons Unknown, Freedom of Expression, Article 8 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR
Harassment Privacy Defamation Human Rights Interim Injunctions Misuse of Private Information Protection From Harassment Act Anonymity Orders +4 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 4 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GYH

Claimant

Persons Unknown

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Harassment/privacy/defamation / Interim Application for Non Disclosure Order (injunction)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to an interim non-disclosure order restraining harassment and publication of private/defamatory information online
  2. 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to hear the application and grant relief against persons unknown
  3. 3 Whether all practicable steps to notify the defendant and relevant third parties have been taken

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant established a strong prima facie case of harassment, misuse of private information, and defamation by persistent publication of false and intimate information online. The information is inherently private and sensitive, and the distress caused cannot be adequately compensated by damages. The claimant took all practicable steps to notify the defendant and third parties, and compelling reasons justified non-notification of platform providers. The court has jurisdiction and the balance of convenience favours granting an interim injunction restraining further harassment and publication, with appropriate exceptions and refinements to the order.

Court Disposition

Interim non-disclosure order (injunction) granted with modifications

Orders

  • Prohibition on the defendant from pursuing a course of conduct amounting to harassment of the claimant, contrary to the Protection from Harassment Act 1997
  • Prohibition on publishing or causing publication of specified private information about the claimant as set out in Confidential Schedule A