Smith & Anor v Copestake [2026] EWHC 924 (KB) (22 April 2026)

Smith & Anor v Copestake [2026] EWHC 924 (KB) (22 April 2026)

The application for interim injunctive relief is dismissed because the claimants have not established that it is more likely than not that publication should not be allowed, nor that the threshold for harassment, misuse of private information, or breach of confidence is met. The relief sought would disproportionately interfere with the defendant's right to freedom of expression, and damages would be an adequate remedy for the remaining claims.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 924 (KB)
Parties
First Claimant: Benjamin James Smith; Second Claimant: Rise Capital Holdings Limited; Defendant: Richard Copestake
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Application for Interim Injunction in Civil Proceedings / Interim Application Hearing
Outcome
Application for interim injunctive relief dismissed
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Freedom of Expression, Misuse of Private Information, Unlawful Interference, Breach of Contract
Defamation Harassment Breach of Confidence Contract Law Media Law Interim Injunctions Freedom of Expression Misuse of Private Information +2 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin James Smith

First Claimant

Rise Capital Holdings Limited

Second Claimant

Richard Copestake

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Interim Injunction in Civil Proceedings / Interim Application Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the threshold for interim injunctive relief is met in claims for harassment, defamation, breach of confidence, and unlawful interference
  2. 2 Whether the relief sought would disproportionately interfere with the defendant's right to freedom of expression
  3. 3 Whether damages would be an adequate remedy for the claimants

Ratio Decidendi

The application for interim injunctive relief is dismissed because the claimants have not established that it is more likely than not that publication should not be allowed, nor that the threshold for harassment, misuse of private information, or breach of confidence is met. The relief sought would disproportionately interfere with the defendant's right to freedom of expression, and damages would be an adequate remedy for the remaining claims.

Court Disposition

Application for interim injunctive relief dismissed