As has been widely reported on both side of the Atlantic, a “well-known individual” in the U.K. is currently waiting to hear whether his legal effort to block two media outlets from publishing allegations of “inappropriate and exploitative sexual activity with girls and young women” has been successful. Lawyers for the individual — who denies the allegations — are seeking what’s called a permanent injunction against The Guardian and ITN to stop them publishing what they told the London high court last week was a “wide-ranging and rigorous investigation,” conducted over four years and involving more than 30 sources with first-hand accounts. The argument from the legal team is one they themselves have acknowledged is “highly exceptional” — that the publishing of the allegations against the individual and exposing his identity would “highly likely lead him to commit suicide.” The unusual case has become a major focal point of debate in the U.K. amid widespread speculation on social media over the celebrity’s identity.
But does this argument — that publication “would have a potentially fatal impact”— actually stand up, legally? According to Paul Tweed — a renowned defamation lawyer from Northern Ireland who has represented numbers of big-name clients, including Harrison Ford, Britney Spears, Jennifer Lopez and Justin Timberlake — it does. Tweed acknowledges that such celebrity privacy injunctions, once notorious in British media (they were often referred to as “super-injunctions” although this, technically, also forbids reporting on the existence of the injunction itself), have become a rarity.
But he says that the individual’s legal claim could be accepted in court. In his response, he said that if their story was “published or broadcast, at the earliest opportunity I will kill myself.” His lawyer last week told the court that he has a prior history of attempting to take his own life due to the story. He points to a famous case where Barbra Streisand efforts to sue a photographer over an aerial photo of her Malibu mansion resulted in online demand to see the image skyrocket.
I know it sounds extremely callous, but I think if this was allowed, it would set a very dangerous precedent.”
Extract — continue reading at the source.
