Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators
Thanks to Anonymous,bruncher,niord,gvonge,Shelford, for Donating to support the site
Super Injunctions
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1995
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:26 pm
- Has thanked: 233 times
- Been thanked: 723 times
Super Injunctions
It appears that only a handful of super injunctions have been 'outed'. By definition, it is impossible to gauge whether other super injunctions have been successfully taken out. Private Eye has on occasions discussed a few cases. I presume the process of taking out a super injunction must be watertight in terms of confidentiality between the legal representatives of the party seeking a super injunction and the court. Out of interest has anyone any idea how many individuals would be involved in such a process? Clearly in certain circles there would be gossip based on leaks. Of course, such 'rumours' could not be publicly disseminated. Does anyone know whether there is a definitive situation regarding social media? I have heard that legal representatives have come down heavily on 'posters'.
T7
T7
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1995
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:26 pm
- Has thanked: 233 times
- Been thanked: 723 times
Re: Super Injunctions
Has a super injunction kicked in here? Of course don't respond if the answer is yes.
T7
T7
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2898
- Joined: November 6th, 2016, 9:58 pm
- Has thanked: 1412 times
- Been thanked: 3842 times
Re: Super Injunctions
terminal7 wrote:IOut of interest has anyone any idea how many individuals would be involved in such a process? T7
The minimum would be the client, their solicitor, their barrister and the judge. In theory, a client could use direct access to go directly to a barrister, but it would be very unusual in a case like this.
In practice, of course, there would also be a number of support staff involved, mostly in the solicitors' office, and there would also be various court staff involved in handling the paperwork.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 5428
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
- Has thanked: 3358 times
- Been thanked: 1068 times
Re: Super Injunctions
one presumes orther intered parties must be informed of the super injunction?
otherwise how would they know not to breach it?
otherwise how would they know not to breach it?
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1995
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:26 pm
- Has thanked: 233 times
- Been thanked: 723 times
Re: Super Injunctions
Didds
Knowing about something and publishing are the distinction. The Super Injunction cannot stop someone whispering in your ear that politician/film star/business high roller X or company Y have committed Z. Stuff clearly leaks all the time but the formal media know that they are in serious contempt should they publish anything (even elliptically) that is subject to a SI. Often people will be aware of the presence of a SI and the party involved without knowing what is actually being 'hidden' from public view.
T7
Knowing about something and publishing are the distinction. The Super Injunction cannot stop someone whispering in your ear that politician/film star/business high roller X or company Y have committed Z. Stuff clearly leaks all the time but the formal media know that they are in serious contempt should they publish anything (even elliptically) that is subject to a SI. Often people will be aware of the presence of a SI and the party involved without knowing what is actually being 'hidden' from public view.
T7
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 5428
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
- Has thanked: 3358 times
- Been thanked: 1068 times
Re: Super Injunctions
terminal7 wrote:... the formal media know that they are in serious contempt should they publish anything (even elliptically) that is subject to a SI.
exactly.
So how do the formal media know that soemthing is subject to a SI. ?
given that
The minimum would be the client, their solicitor, their barrister and the judge.
?
Its a straight quiestion I ask. If one is not "the client, their solicitor, their barrister and the judge " - eg the formal media - how would one know that a SI exists?
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1995
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:26 pm
- Has thanked: 233 times
- Been thanked: 723 times
Re: Super Injunctions
My understanding is that the legal departments/advisers of the large media companies are 'made aware' that a SI has been granted for X. I do not know the actual process but I suspect through the grapevine information will be given. Thus any story about X has to be treated with extreme caution., unless the actual context of the SI is known and reporting about other issues concerning X can proceed. Therefore in 'Fleet Street' it will be fairly common knowledge that X has been granted a SI. Indeed, putting 2 and 2 together the rationale for the SI will be easily inferred or indeed known.
T7
T7
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 8291
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 2:30 pm
- Has thanked: 2939 times
- Been thanked: 4049 times
Re: Super Injunctions
It's an oddity whichever way you look at it, because the SI is effectively limited only to the country where it's in force. The last SI of which I was personally aware - the one that involved a famous entertainment personality - was taboo for the English press, but Scotland's Daily Record was able to name the names. As were various high-profile newspaper websites in Canada, Australia and elsewhere, which clearly felt free to describe every salacious detail.
And then there's Twitter, of course.....
Having spent some time on Fleet Street myself (although not in recent decades), we always knew somewhat more than we were allowed to say, but it was left up to the editors to enforce the rules of the moment. And it still goes on. When that poor little kid got murdered in Bridgend the other week, the papers were initially constrained from naming the arrested suspects (mother and stepfather) - although the Mirror (I think?) did say that the police had become suspicious after talking to them, which was a bit of a heavy hint.
BJ
And then there's Twitter, of course.....
Having spent some time on Fleet Street myself (although not in recent decades), we always knew somewhat more than we were allowed to say, but it was left up to the editors to enforce the rules of the moment. And it still goes on. When that poor little kid got murdered in Bridgend the other week, the papers were initially constrained from naming the arrested suspects (mother and stepfather) - although the Mirror (I think?) did say that the police had become suspicious after talking to them, which was a bit of a heavy hint.
BJ
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 1995
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:26 pm
- Has thanked: 233 times
- Been thanked: 723 times
Re: Super Injunctions
BJ - As regards social media - I understand that the legal representatives of X will be very thorough in identifying infractions of the SI and come down heavily with threats of legal action upon the platform and poster in order to get the 'message' removed. In addition to PE articles
T7
T7
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 4926
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:15 am
- Has thanked: 636 times
- Been thanked: 2747 times
Re: Super Injunctions
All it needs is one MP to let the cat out of the bag and the injunction is pointless. Parliamentary 'priviledge' beats a super injunction AFAIAA.
Return to “Legal Issues (Practical)”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests