AMM v HXW: QBD 7 Oct 2010

The claimant had sought and been granted an injunction to prevent the defendant publicising matters which had passed between them and which were he said private.
Held: The jurisdiction to grant such injunctions was now established. Publication would cause damage to the claimant’s private life, damages would not be an adequate remedy, and the defendant had not sought to argue any proper public interest in the material. The court considered its alternatives where the it was suggested that the defendant may have been guilty of blackmail, but where, as here, there had already been limited public disclosure. As in TFD at this interim stage it was not necessary to consider whether the defendant had the right to publish what she threatened.

Tugendhat J
[2010] EWHC 2457 (QB)
Theft Act 1968 21
England and Wales
CitedDuchess of Argyll v Duke of Argyll ChD 1967
An interlocutory injunction was granted to protect against the revelation of marital confidences, and the newspaper to which the Duke had communicated such information about the Duchess was restrained from publishing it. The concept of . .
CitedStephens v Avery ChD 1988
The parties had been friends and had discussed their sex lives. The defendant took the information to a newspaper and its editor, the second and subsequent defendants who published it. The plaintiff sought damages saying the conversations and . .
CitedAsh and Another v McKennitt and others CA 14-Dec-2006
The claimant was a celebrated Canadian folk musician. The defendant, a former friend, published a story of their close friendship. The claimant said the relationship had been private, and publication infringed her privacy rights, and she obtained an . .
CitedDFT v TFD QBD 27-Sep-2010
The court heard an application for an injunction to restrain publication of material relating to the claimant’s private and sexual life.
Held: An injunction restraining publication and identification, but not an order restraining publication . .
CitedThorne v Motor Trade Association HL 1937
The House confirmed a declaration granted as to validity of a rule of association notwithstanding the absence of any dispute. The House considered the nature of the threat required to establish a defence of duress.
Lord Wright observed that the . .
CitedRegina v Socialist Worker Printers and Publishers Ltd, Ex parte Attorney-General CA 1974
In a blackmail case, the court ordered non publication of the names of the complainants. Thinking they were not bound, the defendants published the names.
Held: The publishers and Mr Michael Foot were held to be in contempt of court in . .
CitedIn re an Inquiry Under The Company Securities (Insider Dealing) Act 1985 HL 1988
The term ‘necessary’ will take its colour from its context; in ordinary usage it may mean, at one end of the scale, ‘indispensable’ and at the other ‘useful’ or ‘expedient’.
Lord Griffiths said: ‘What then is meant by the words ‘necessary . . . .
CitedSecretary of State for The Home Department v AP (No. 2) SC 23-Jun-2010
The claimant had object to a Control order made against him and against a decision that he be deported. He had been protected by an anonymity order, but the Court now considered whether it should be continued.
Held: AP had already by the . .
CitedIn re Guardian News and Media Ltd and Others; HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others SC 27-Jan-2010
Proceedings had been brought to challenge the validity of Orders in Council which had frozen the assets of the claimants in those proceedings. Ancillary orders were made and confirmed requiring them not to be identified. As the cases came to the . .
CitedFinancial Times Ltd and others v Interbrew SA CA 8-Mar-2002
The appellants appealed against orders for delivery up of papers belonging to the claimant. The paper was a market sensitive report which had been stolen and doctored before being handed to the appellant.
Held: The Ashworth Hospital case . .
CitedX Ltd v Morgan-Grampian (Publishers) Ltd HL 1990
In a case where a contemnor not only fails wilfully and contumaciously to comply with an order of the court but makes it clear that he will continue to defy the court’s authority if the order should be affirmed on appeal, the court must have a . .

Cited by:
CitedNNN v Ryan and Others QBD 20-Mar-2013
The Court gave its reasons for requiring the delivery up of materials said to be confidential and making an order for anonymity, finding that the claimant had been blackmailed. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Family, Litigation Practice

Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.424970