2 posts / 0 new
Last post
Catchfire Catchfire's picture

"Yet again my name and reputation have been trashed while the man I had a relationship with is able to hide."


Imogen Thomas, the former Big Brother contestant whose relationship with a married Premier League footballer was made the subject of a court gagging order, along with the Sun is seeking to overturn the injunction.




Thomas said on Monday she was "stunned" after Mr Justice Eady reserved judgment in the high court on whether to lift the gagging order and published his reasons for granting the injunction in April....


What's more I can't even defend myself because I have been gagged. If this is the way privacy injunctions are supposed to work there is something seriously wrong with the law.


"I have read the judgment and I am stunned by how I am portrayed."


Thomas was speaking after Eady explained why he made an order banning journalists from reporting the identity of a footballer involved in a relationship with the reality television contestant.


He also issued a written account of his reasons for making the order after listening to arguments from lawyers representing the footballer, Thomas and the Sun newspaper at a private hearing. 


Thomas had previously claimed that she had been "thrown to the lions" because, unlike the soccer star, she did not have the money to pay for her name to be kept private.



"In a secret hearing, Fred Goodwin has obtained a super injunction preventing him from being identified as a banker," he told his stunned colleagues. "Will the government hold a debate, or make a statement, on freedom of speech and whether there is one law for the rich, such as Fred Goodwin, and another for the poor?"

His 77-word statement about Sir Fred, the former chief executive of the Royal Bank of Scotland, set parliament on a collision course with the judiciary, pitching the 300-year-old right of parliamentary privilege against the super-injunction, a draconian gagging order which has only existed in Britain since 2002.

Yesterday parliament struck a significant victory for freedom of speech when Lord Stonehouse, the Liberal Democrat peer, revealed in parliament the fact the order related to an affair with a senior colleague.

Twitter and unnamed Twitterers sued by anonymous man

Twitter and certain Twitter users have been sued in the High Court in London by an individual referred to only by the initials "CTB".

The initials are meant to maintain the anonymity of the individual, but the same initials were used in a previous suit brought by a professional footballer in the UK who has won a so-called "super injunction" that bars the media from publishing stories about an affair he allegedly had with a reality TV star, the Financial Times reports.

The suit was filed against Twitter on May 18, and it also names “persons unknown responsible for the publication of information on the Twitter accounts”. Twitter did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The six tweets in question.






Issues Pages: 
Catchfire Catchfire's picture

John Hemming: the MP who outed Ryan Giggs in superinjunctions row

John Hemming, the Liberal Democrat MP who named Ryan Giggs, is something of a loner who has developed a knack for grabbing headlines by outing public figures who have taken out injunctions to protect their privacy.

The full extent of superinjunctions, whose existence cannot even be reported, was brought to public attention by Hemming in March when he told MPs that Sir Fred Goodwin had obtained one. This prompted headlines that the press was not even allowed to report that Goodwin was a banker.

It was left to Lord Stoneham, a Lib Dem colleague of Hemming, to explain the reasons for the injunction when he told peers last week that Goodwin took out the order to "hide" an alleged relationship with a colleague at the Royal Bank of Scotland.

Hemming, who was first elected as MP for Birmingham Yardley at the 2005 general election, is not a clubbable figure at Westminster. But he is an energetic campaigner who used parliamentary privilege last month to name a woman involved in a child custody case who was threatened with jail for speaking to politicians.