SPA v TAS [2014] EWHC 1512 (QB) (14 May 2014)

SPA v TAS [2014] EWHC 1512 (QB) (14 May 2014)

The claimant is likely to establish that publication of the information should not be allowed; interim non-disclosure and anonymity orders are justified to protect private information and prevent blackmail.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 1512
Parties
Claimant: SPA; Defendant: TAS
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interim Application for Non Disclosure Order
Outcome
Interim non-disclosure and anonymity orders granted; undertakings accepted from defendant.
Legal Topics
Interim Non Disclosure Orders, Anonymity Orders, Blackmail, Confidential Information
Privacy Employment Civil Procedure Interim Non Disclosure Orders Anonymity Orders Blackmail Confidential Information

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SPA

Claimant

TAS

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interim Application for Non Disclosure Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a non-disclosure order should be granted to protect private information allegedly threatened with disclosure by the defendant
  2. 2 Whether anonymity orders are appropriate in cases of alleged blackmail

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant is likely to establish that publication of the information should not be allowed; interim non-disclosure and anonymity orders are justified to protect private information and prevent blackmail.

Court Disposition

Interim non-disclosure and anonymity orders granted; undertakings accepted from defendant.

Orders

  • Defendant must not use, publish, communicate, or disclose specified information for a period ending 10 November 2014.
  • Anonymity orders for both parties.