RST v UVW (Rev 1)

RST v UVW (Rev 1)

The applicant is likely to establish that publication should not be allowed under s.12(3) Human Rights Act. The facts justify granting an interim injunction without notice due to the risk of the respondent frustrating the order if notified. The claim is advanced as one for privacy/confidentiality, not defamation, and the written agreement supports the applicant's expectation of privacy. The court grants the interim injunction, but notes the issue of whether the rule in Bonnard v Perryman applies to privacy/confidentiality claims remains open for future determination.

Parties
Claimant: RST; Defendant: UVW
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil (privacy/confidentiality) / Interim Application for Injunction (without Notice)
Outcome
Interim injunction granted (without notice)
Legal Topics
Interim Injunctions, Anonymity Orders, Freedom of Expression, Right to Private Life, Abuse of Process, Contractual Confidentiality
Privacy Law Confidentiality Human Rights Interim Injunctions Anonymity Orders Freedom of Expression Right to Private Life Abuse of Process +1 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

RST

Claimant

UVW

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (privacy/confidentiality) / Interim Application for Injunction (without Notice)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim injunction restraining publication of private/confidential information should be granted without notice
  2. 2 Whether the rule in Bonnard v Perryman (no interim injunction in defamation where truth is alleged) applies to privacy/confidentiality claims
  3. 3 Whether the claim is genuinely for privacy/confidentiality or is an abuse to protect reputation

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant is likely to establish that publication should not be allowed under s.12(3) Human Rights Act. The facts justify granting an interim injunction without notice due to the risk of the respondent frustrating the order if notified. The claim is advanced as one for privacy/confidentiality, not defamation, and the written agreement supports the applicant's expectation of privacy. The court grants the interim injunction, but notes the issue of whether the rule in Bonnard v Perryman applies to privacy/confidentiality claims remains open for future determination.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted (without notice)

Orders

  • Defendant restrained from disclosing confidential information as set out in the order and schedule
  • Proceedings anonymised; parties referred to as RST and UVW