‘Famous man’ cannot be named despite losing bid for injunction to stop reporting of allegations.
A famous man has lost his bid for a High Court injunction against two media organisations to prevent the publication of allegations against him, but cannot yet be named.
The man brought legal action against Independent Television News (ITN), which produces news programmes for ITV, Channel 4, Good Morning Britain and Channel 5, and Guardian News and Media (GNM), publisher of The Guardian.
During a two-day trial in late October, the High Court in London was told by lawyers for the media organisations that the allegations they want to report involve the man’s alleged “abuse of power and status” to contact young women and try to engage in “inappropriate and exploitative sexual activities”.
The well-known man, who denies the claims, sought an injunction to prevent this broadcast and publication because of a risk that he would take his own life, after two previous suicide attempts.
In a judgment on Tuesday, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed the injunction bid and said in a summary of his ruling: “The claimant’s claim for an injunction was dismissed.
“The court did not determine whether the allegations, or any of them, were true, and the dismissal of the claim does not amount to approval of any publication the defendants may decide to make.”
What is an injunction?
There are two types of injunctions: A prohibitory injunction stops someone from doing something; A mandatory injunction forces someone to take action. Both are awarded by a judge.
He added that the man will remain anonymous to allow any appeal bids to be lodged.
Following the High Court judgment Sara Mansoori KC, for the individual, asked the court for time to decide whether they would seek the green light to challenge the ruling.
She said that her client is “in a highly vulnerable position” and has “not been in a position to give us instructions on any appeal”.
She continued that it is “not clear” when these instructions could come, but that she hoped to be able to confirm the position by Thursday.
Mr Justice Nicklin said: “The court has moved exceptionally quickly to accommodate this trial and to produce a judgment.
“It is slightly concerning that there is not an ability to proceed today.”
The unnamed man’s legal team have previously said he denies the allegations of wrongdoing and that publication “would have a potentially fatal impact”.
Ms Mansoori KC told the court: “The only reason they would not be fatal is because the claimant would be locked up and prevented from his desire to end his life.”
The barrister also said the claimant “has no intention of returning to public life”.
Gavin Millar KC, for ITN and GNM, said the case risks “dragging judges into assessing the causes of suicidal ideation, which are for professionals and not for a judge”.
He added: “The obligation falls on the hospital to keep him safe, and that’s that.”
He later said: “Plainly, the proposed publication would make a valuable contribution to a debate of public importance, about men using their power to be able to misconduct themselves against women in that area of society.”
Samaritans can be contacted for free, day or night, 365 days a year, on 116 123, or visit samaritans.org to find your nearest branch.
