Super-injunctions crumble as 'genie let out of bottle'

Published on Monday 9 May 2011 19:19

LEAKS on Twitter could lead to the end of superinjunctions, experts have predicted, but people posting the comments may face jail.

Postings on the social networking site - including some that were inaccurate - have highlighted the difficulty in enforcing privacy orders on the internet, where so much information is published it is impossible to vet.

Media lawyer Mark Stephens said: "The cat is out of the bag, the genie - or genies - are out of the bottle, and there's nothing secret any more.

"As a result of that, the court is going to have to recall these injunctions, the people will be named and it will all be brought into the public domain."

He predicted the person responsible for the Tweets, who has the username InjunctionSuper, will be the subject of a criminal investigation.

Mr Stephens said: "It's a gross contempt of court. I expect that, within the next 48 hours, they will receive a knock on the door and they should take their toothbrush with them, because they're going straight to jail."

However, he added: "The bottom line here is that so many people - 40,000 - are now following the person who broke these superinjunctions. Many have re-tweeted that information. In these circumstances it is impossible for the court to protect the order.

• Analysis: Internet democracy sounds the death knell for the judges

Applying for a superinjunction is like painting a large target on your back - everyone wants to find out who you are and what you've done."

He argued there is a strong moral case for ending the phenomenon of superinjunctions.

"There is a very good reason for these to be made public, at least to some degree," Mr Stephens said.

"One man had unprotected sex with a prostitute," Mr Stephens said. "His partner has the right to know that her sexual health has been compromised, but the court has conspired so that she is in ignorance.

"Many of these men had sex with prostitutes or women not exclusive to them, which compromises the sexual health of long-term partners."

Writing in today's Scotsman, internet law expert Yair Cohen, who has previously obtained court injunctions against Google and YouTube, forcing them to remove defamatory content, predicted "superinjunctions will suffer death by a mob sooner or later. Either the courts will simply stop granting them or celebrities will realise that, in the fast- moving internet world, these superinjunctions will bring them more harm than good," he writes.

Frank Johnstone, convener of the privacy committee of the Law Society of Scotland, added: "The argument is, what is the point if the superinjunction engenders more publicity than they would otherwise have got?"

Some allegations of superinjunction being taken out have been strongly denied.

Jemima Khan described claims she applied for an order preventing "intimate photos" of herself and Jeremy Clarkson being published as "untrue and upsetting"."I hope the people who made this story up realise that my sons will be bullied at school because of it," she said.

Gabby Logan, who is married to former Scotland rugby international Kenny Logan, denied claims she had an affair with Alan Shearer.

"I'm a happily married and faithful wife," she said. "It is devastating and hurtful that malicious lies can be circulated on the internet without control, when people who genuinely do have something to hide can be protected by court rulings."