PJS v News Group Newspapers Ltd
An injunction protecting private information could be maintained even after the information had been widely published online and abroad, because further publication would cause further intrusion.
Facts
PJS, a well known person in the entertainment business, was married to another well known person, YMA, with whom he had young children. A newspaper wanted to publish a story about PJS's extramarital sexual activities with another couple. PJS obtained an interim injunction to stop publication. The story was then published in the United States, Canada and Scotland, and widely circulated on the internet and social media. The newspaper argued that the injunction should be lifted, because the information was no longer private.
Legal principle
The Supreme Court held, by a majority of four to one, that the interim injunction should continue until trial. Lord Mance said that the tort of misuse of private information is concerned with intrusion as well as confidentiality, and that publication in the English print media would cause a qualitatively different and greater intrusion into the private lives of PJS, his partner and their children than publication on the internet. There was no public interest in the story, which had no bearing on any public debate, and the interests of the children weighed in favour of the injunction. Lord Toulson dissented, saying that the injunction had become futile. The case is often contrasted with the Spycatcher decision.
Related cases on civil liberties: expression, assembly, privacy and police powers
- Attorney General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) [1990] 1 AC 109
- Austin v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2009] UKHL 5, [2009] 1 AC 564
- Beatty v Gillbanks (1882) 9 QBD 308
- Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] UKHL 22, [2004] 2 AC 457
- Christie v Leachinsky [1947] AC 573
- Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd [1993] AC 534
- Director of Public Prosecutions v Ziegler [2021] UKSC 23, [2022] AC 408
- Duncan v Jones [1936] 1 KB 218
Studying public law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
