Lawyers for Elton John and David Furnish have pleaded with the Supreme Court to extend a Court of Appeal decision to ban the British press from publishing details about the celebrity threesome scandal the pair are currently embroiled in.
The couple have argued that the need for the gagging order is greater now than it was just weeks ago, as media outlets in the UK have criticised the pair for stifling free speech and setting a dangerous precedent for freedom of the press.
After hearing arguments from the couple’s lawyers, Lord Neuberger, the president of the Supreme Court, said judges would debate the case and announce their decision in the near future.
BYPASS THE CENSORS
Sign up to get unfiltered news delivered straight to your inbox.
You can unsubscribe any time. By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use
Telegraph.co.uk reports:
A court order bars publication of the celebrities’ names in England and Wales until then.
During the hearing Desmond Browne QC, for the claimant, said: “Overall may we say that the need for the injunction may have been diminished but it has not been extinguished.
“The need for the protection from the intrusion remains as great if not greater.
“This has been said by some to be the death of the injunction. We hope those reports are greatly exaggerated.”
Lord Mance, one of the judges on the panel, questioned whether the publication of overseas online outlets could cause more “harm” than newspapers.
He said: “Hard copy newspapers in some respect may be regarded as causing less harm than the internet which is, subject to deletions, technically permanent.”
Mr Browne responded by saying “you cannot wrap up fish and chips with internet publications”.
“I see the point me lordship is making but it doesn’t in my submission have any practical significance,” he added.
Death of the celebrity privacy injunction?
The Sun on Sunday newspaper wants to publish an account of the man’s alleged extra-marital activities.
But the man has argued that he has a right to privacy and has taken legal action.
The newspaper won the first round in January when a High Court judge refused to impose an injunction barring publication.
But the man appealed – and two appeal court judges ruled in his favour.
Lord Justice Jackson and Lady Justice King imposed an injunction preventing the newspaper from identifying the man in an article.
Lawyers for News Group Newspapers, publishers of The Sun on Sunday, then asked three appeal judges to lift the ban after the man’s identity emerged online.
They told Lord Justice Jackson, Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Simon, at a Court of Appeal hearing in London on Friday, that the ban should go because the man had been named in articles abroad – outside the legal jurisdiction of England and Wales – and his name could be found on the internet.
The man opposed the application and said the ban should stay.
But on Monday Lord Justice Jackson, Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Simon ruled in the newspaper’s favour.
Using children ‘cannot be a trump card’
Lord Jackson warned the celebrity couple that using their children in the application “cannot be a trump card”.
“In my view, whether or not the court grants an injunction, it is inevitable that he two children in due course learn about these matters,” Lord Justice Jackson added.
“For the reasons set out above, in my view the injunction restraining publication of the information identified … must be set aside.”
How legal process ‘descended into farce’
The appeal against the injunction was launched last week after the scandal was widely reported worldwide as the process descended into farce.
The names appeared in an American tabloid and were widely repeated online.
A Sunday newspaper in Scotland, where the injunction did not apply, disclosed the identities nearly two weeks ago.
In the appeal court’s written ruling, the judges accepted that stopping other websites from publishing details would be a “hopeless task”.
“Furthermore, this court has little control over what foreign newspapers and magazines may publish,” they wrote.
Sean Adl-Tabatabai
I should imagine the gagging order was more to do with their children than themselves …I mean who cares …?
I should imagine the gagging order was more to do with their children than themselves …I mean who cares …?
normally families having children don’t go off engaging in orgies with others….not great for the childrens mental stability and sense of family; I’m sure Lord Neuberger / MAnce knows best and this isn’t some fagocracy ruling….not.
normally families having children don’t go off engaging in orgies with others….not great for the childrens mental stability and sense of family; I’m sure Lord Neuberger / MAnce knows best and this isn’t some fagocracy ruling….not.
who did who is worse than kims pooh dirt for a dollar zine world grubby-SS