English privacy injunctions called into question

The man, whose identity was revealed in a US publication, is said to have been involved in a “three-way sexual encounter”, but an injunction granted by the Court of Appeal in London means the British press cannot name him.

Media lawyers have called into question the purpose of privacy injunctions in an era in which they can be so easily undermined on social media.

Mark Stephens, an international media lawyer at Howard Kennedy, said: “In a case like this, injunctions should have also been obtained in the States, where this couple are widely known, and it is unfortunate they were not. Now it is a question of how best to prevent the amplification of the names.”

Mr Stephens previously told BBC Radio 4’s Media Show that having children gives celebrities a better chance of obtaining an injunction.

He said: “The rich and famous with children are now going to be able to put forward the saccharine images … their primped and preened images by their spin doctors and the public won’t be able to have them gainsaid by the free press.”

“Now we are seeing children thrown under the bus, the legal bus, to prevent stories coming out. It seems to me not without notice that one of the judges was a family law judge and therefore brought that very perspective of the children.”

“The message to celebrities that goes out is that if you are going to have a ménage à trois or an open relationship make sure you’ve got children.”