• ohulancutash@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Superinjunctions were popular at the time but are less used now. Case in point with the current proceedings brought by a Very Famous Person who wishes to restrain two news orgs from reporting serious allegations about him from several women (and from them coming forward otherwise), on the basis that he will commit suicide if it becomes public and this is a breach of his human right to life.

      Back in the 2010s this would be a superinjunction with no-one even allowed to mention there is a case before the court, and the Very Famous Person even tried to supress that the news orgs in question were the Guardian and ITN, but he was refused that, and indeed his attempt at an injunction was denied on tuesday, on the basis that his mental health was up to the NHS which has him in secure detention, not up to the news media. He was given leave to appeal but unless that goes forward the stories will run.

      So things have changed a bit.

    • 7112@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      80
      ·
      1 day ago

      This is the part that got me:

      It prohibits Ms Berki from telling anyone what she says happened to her – not journalists, not friends, not family, and not even the police. The court also orderd Ms Berki to pay £50,000 in legal costs within two weeks (which she couldn’t afford) and authorised her bankruptcy.

      • TWeaK@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Don’t forget the bit where it explicitly names the only doctors she’s allowed to speak to about this, who don’t work at her GP surgery anymore. So she can’t speak to a doctor about any of this except in an emergency.

      • krashmo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        ·
        1 day ago

        Fuck you government, I’ll say what I want. I wouldn’t be able to stop myself from talking to a journalist the next day

        • shalafi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          21 hours ago

          I’d bring the malicious compliance in force.

          “Hi Mr. Journalist. You should take a look at this injunction the court laid on me. I’m an unable to speak to you about this, but you can read it yourself. I’d be glad to come on TV and talk about how I can’t talk about this.”

          • TWeaK@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            11 hours ago

            The thing is the injunction also prevents anyone who knows about it from publicising it. Even taxpolicy.org.uk here are on very shaky ground, and they explicitly didn’t publish parts of the order.