My last post was about people we cannot name. I think it’s bloody ridiculous in this time of world wide instant access to information, that ANY celebrity would have such little common sense as to apply for a celebrity injunction, ever.
It’s a daft thing to do and it shouldn’t be allowed because it’s an arrogant abuse of power.
Seems this case about the people we may not name, might be the end of such a stupid idea – and the end of the law that allows it.
And a good thing too!
“Why the law is an ass!” was the popular Daily Mail’s front-page headline on April 7.
The Sun on Sunday tabloid, which obtained the story from two of the people involved in the threesome, went back to the Court of Appeal, which had granted the injunction in January, and persuaded the judges to lift it.
“It is in my view inappropriate (some may use a stronger term) for the court to ban people from saying that which is common knowledge,” Lord Justice Jackson wrote in a ruling handed down on Monday.
But he left the ban in place to allow the celebrity to appeal to the Supreme Court, and for now the protagonists still cannot be named in media that appear in England.
Some lawyers say the celebrity injunction is on its last legs.
“The judgement may be treated as the death of the celebrity privacy injunction,” Desmond Browne, the lawyer for one of the people involved, told the Court of Appeal after its ruling to lift the order.