AMV v TDX [2025] EWHC 2250 (KB) (30 May 2025)

AMV v TDX [2025] EWHC 2250 (KB) (30 May 2025)

The claimant is likely to establish that publication of the confidential information should not be allowed, the information is inherently private, there is no public interest in disclosure, and the balance of convenience favours interim relief to prevent serious harm pending a return date.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2250 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: AMV; Defendant: TDX
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Interim Injunction Application / Without Notice, Interim Hearing
Outcome
Interim injunction granted
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Anonymity Orders, Private Hearings, Balance of Convenience, Section 12 Human Rights Act 1998
Privacy Confidentiality Human Rights Interim Injunctions Anonymity Orders Private Hearings Balance of Convenience Section 12 Human Rights Act 1998

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AMV

Claimant

TDX

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interim Injunction Application / Without Notice, Interim Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant an interim injunction restraining publication of confidential information
  2. 2 Whether the hearing should be held in private and the claimant anonymised
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favours granting interim relief

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant is likely to establish that publication of the confidential information should not be allowed, the information is inherently private, there is no public interest in disclosure, and the balance of convenience favours interim relief to prevent serious harm pending a return date.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted

Orders

  • Defendant restrained from publishing confidential information identified in the order
  • Ancillary orders granted