Summary

In January 2016, the Court of Appeal discharged an interim injunction that prevented newspapers from publishing identification of celebrity PJS, or the facts or details relating to the sexual activities of PJS with two other people. The Court of Appeal discharged the injunction on the basis that the appearance of the information on the Internet, despite the injunction, had shifted the balance of the newspapers’ Article 10 rights (freedom of expression) against the Article 8 rights (private life) of PJS.

PJS appealed to the Supreme Court in a rolled-up hearing. The Court unanimously granted PJS’s application for permission to appeal, and by a majority, allowed the appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision to discharge an interim privacy injunction.

The cases mentioned or made reference to in this podcast are:

PJS v News Group Newspapers [2016] EWCA Civ 100

Re S (A Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) [2004] UKHL 47

McKennitt v Ash [2006] EWCA Civ 1714

Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2008] EWHC 687 (QB)

Armoniene v Lithuania [2009] EMLR 7

Mosley v UK [2012] EMLR 1

CTB v News Group Newspaper Ltd [2011] EWHC 1326 (QB)

JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2010] EWHC 2818 (QB)