Celebrity injunction: Decision to overturn privacy order will go to Supreme Court
Justices will decide whether the man can launch a legal challenge on Thursday
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Judges will allow a celebrity who wants to keep an injunction preventing a tabloid newspaper story being published to have his claim analysed by Supreme Court justices later this week.
The Sun on Sunday was hit by an injunction banning it from reporting on the celebrity's alleged “extra-marital activities” in January. The paper mounted a legal challenge against the decision and asked for the order to be overturned because the man and his spouse have already been named by publications in the US and Scotland and a political blogger. Judges at the Court of Appeal ruled in the newspaper’s favour on Monday.
The man, named in court documents as PJS, asked for permission to take his case to the Supreme Court on Tuesday.
PJS’s case will be heard by justices in the Supreme Court on Thursday, where they will decide whether he can launch a legal challenge, a spokesperson for the Court told the Press Association. The injunction barring the media from naming the individual will remain in place until then.
In January, Court of Appeal judges said identifying PJS and publishing the story would be “devastating” for him and would “generate a media storm” that would make their young children the subject of increased press attention.
But after ruling in the Sun on Sunday’s favour, Lord Justice Jackson said “knowledge of the relevant matters is now so widespread that confidentiality has probably been lost,” and the harm the injunction was designed to counter had already likely taken place.