PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 3177 (QB) (22 October 2013)

PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 3177 (QB) (22 October 2013)

The claimant failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success at trial for a privacy injunction. The court held that the public interest in open justice and reporting criminal proceedings, including identification of individuals involved, outweighed the claimant's Article 8 rights. The information, having been mentioned in open court, no longer attracted a reasonable expectation of privacy. The evidence relating to harm to children was insufficient to tip the balance. The injunction sought would be of limited benefit and risked fostering sinister conclusions about the claimant. The application was refused.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 3177 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: PNM; Defendant: Times Newspapers Ltd; Defendant: Andrew Norfolk; Defendant: Newsquest (Oxfordshire and Wiltshire) Limited; Defendant: Ben Wilkinson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 October 2013
Procedural Posture
High Court Application for Interim Non Disclosure Order (privacy Injunction) / Interlocutory Hearing
Outcome
Application for interim privacy injunction refused
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Reporting Restrictions, Misuse of Private Information, Open Justice, Article 8 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR
Media Law Privacy Law Human Rights Law Civil Procedure Interim Injunctions Reporting Restrictions Misuse of Private Information Open Justice +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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PNM

Claimant

Times Newspapers Ltd

Defendant

Andrew Norfolk

Defendant

Newsquest (Oxfordshire and Wiltshire) Limited

Defendant

Ben Wilkinson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

High Court Application for Interim Non Disclosure Order (privacy Injunction) / Interlocutory Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to an interim privacy injunction restraining publication of information liable to identify him as a suspect in child abuse investigations
  2. 2 Whether the claimant has a reasonable expectation of privacy over information disclosed in open court
  3. 3 Whether the public interest in open justice and reporting outweighs the claimant's Article 8 rights

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success at trial for a privacy injunction. The court held that the public interest in open justice and reporting criminal proceedings, including identification of individuals involved, outweighed the claimant's Article 8 rights. The information, having been mentioned in open court, no longer attracted a reasonable expectation of privacy. The evidence relating to harm to children was insufficient to tip the balance. The injunction sought would be of limited benefit and risked fostering sinister conclusions about the claimant. The application was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for interim privacy injunction refused

Orders

  • No interim non-disclosure order granted
  • Reporting restrictions not extended beyond existing s.4(2) order