Blog editor 'threatened with jail' after breaking celebrity injunction

The editor of a leading blog has been threatened with prosecution for allegedly breaching an injunction preventing the naming of a celebrity couple at the centre of the privacy order.

The Court of Appeal granted an order in January preventing the press identifying the man and his spouse in reports of a “three-way sexual encounter”. But it only applies to media organisations in England and Wales, which means an American magazine and a Scottish newspaper have been able publish the banned names.

A political blog has now followed suit, saying the article was written in the Republic of Ireland and published on US-based servers, meaning the injunction was not violated.

Carter Ruck, a legal firm representing the celebrity couple, has now reportedly contacted the website’s editor threatening them with a possible fine and imprisonment under the Contempt of Court Act.

“There are no physical assets in the UK, there is no digital equivalent of a printing press, no device that can be seized or smashed,” the blogger wrote. “Web users point their browsers at a server in the US and fetch the data back, we do not store published content in the UK.”

An Irish law firm has also raised the prospect of proceedings over the identification in Ireland.

Mark Stephens, a media lawyer with Howard Kennedy LLP, told The Independent that despite the article being written and published outside the UK, the blog editor may still be subject to the order as a British resident.

“This appears to be a very deliberate and flagrant attempt to violate the order because he knew about the injunction,” he said.

“While in Ireland I suspect he won’t have anything done to him, the moment he sets foot in the UK he can be arrested and charged with contempt.”

Violating an injunction can be punished under the Contempt of Court Act, which can warrant an unlimited fine and up to two years in prison, although such a severe punishment is rare.

Mr Stephens said he had never heard of an injunction case resulting in a jail term but believed a court would take the blog’s infringement “very seriously”.

“The courts will be considering the impact on the children, who judges were seeking to protect,” he added.

“The editor will be required to come to court and explain his decision to the judges, who will determine whatever sentence or fine is appropriate.

“They normally wouldn’t expect to go to jail but I can see the court taking the view that this is very serious and appears to have deliberately targeted England and Wales.”

The story has sparked fresh debate over the use of injunctions against the British press, following a high-profile row over a Premier League footballer’s efforts to stop reports of his affair in 2011.

News UK has lodged a new application to discharge the order with the Court of Appeal. It is currently being processed by the court and no date has yet been set for a hearing.

In the original ruling, made on 22 January, Lord Justice Jackson said both the man, referred to as PJS, and his spouse, YMA, disputed that the publication of a story on an alleged extramarital threesome “would serve any public interest”.

The judge said publishing the story would be “devastating” for the man and would “generate a media storm” – saying the couple's children would become the subject of increased press attention.

Lord Justice Jackson revealed the man had appealed after a High Court judge refused to grant him an injunction against publishers News Group Newspapers. He said he and Lady Justice King decided to allow his appeal after balancing the man's human right to respect for family life and the newspaper's right to freedom of expression.