Difference is
YOU disclosed it. It was your decision.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with what you say but because only public figures use this legislation it looks like the thin edge of the wedge.

When a proper whistleblower with something important to say is stopped from doing so by this legislation it will be because the case law has been developed to that point by whingeing famous wankers.

That said, famous or not, the law is the law. (help me here 'swipe).
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:32, 4 replies, latest was 15 years ago)

if that is your point
then whoever he was shagging has every right to talk about it if she wants.

Perhaps the person doing the blowing up Monty's arse didn't want it known?
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:34, Reply)

Then they should have the right to stop him.
As Andrew Marr's wife does.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:35, Reply)

she didn't take out the injunction though
and I'm not so sure she does have that right.
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:36, Reply)

He did.
Perhaps for that reason, we are not privvy to the pleading for the injunction.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:37, Reply)

Hahaha you said 'privy'!!!!!!!

( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:39, Reply)

now all I can think of is trying to force some lame joke
regarding pleading, injunctions and the privvy (i.e. lavatory)
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:39, Reply)

Don't get bogged down with this. You're getting a little flushed.

( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:57, Reply)

You should log out until you've calmed down.

( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 17:00, Reply)

That isn't actually going to happen though
because, as with the whole MPs expenses revelations, once there is actually a legitamate public interest case, you can't have a super injunction.

BUT, the trouble with the existance of them at all is that people with lots of money (Trafigura) can tie up the case in protracted legal wrangling even when they are always going to lose.

So my argument is that they are not a good thing.
(Bazongaloid, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:36, Reply)

Trafigura were outed in the end, as most are.
I don't think they are GOOD. I think one is entitled to privacy where no public interest exists.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:38, Reply)

Yes, you are
and the law already covers that, so if someone blows your privacy with no public interest you can get an injunction, or just take them to the cleaners afterwards.

But the Trafigura case didn't come to light for years, and only after an MP mentioned it in the westminster using his commons priviledge
(Bazongaloid, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:42, Reply)

Because they was a valid injunction in place.
And I don't mean valid, just enforceable.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:44, Reply)

Yes, exactly
they got away with having a super injunction which prevented papers publishing that they have caused a fucking awful spill and the only reason it came out was because an MP got involved. There was clearly a public interest.

This is a good case to demonstrate the dangers of the existence of super injunctions.
(Bazongaloid, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:47, Reply)

Judges fault.
Not the legislation or principle.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:52, Reply)

No, I think it's very much the fault of the principle.
The story itself clearly had public interest so while the specifics of the actual fault were being worked out the papers could have been reporting that a spill happened, but that the person whose fault it was had not been determined. There was no need to have a super injunction. The fact that they exist is dangerous as it gives the power to the people who have lots of money, it's got fuck all to do with "general rights to privacy".
(Bazongaloid, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:57, Reply)

I think Judas Priest put it best when they said
'Breaking the law, breaking the law' dressed as San Franciscan homosexual motorcyclists.

(as you can see, I don't really have a sensible argument)
( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:36, Reply)

If you were an MP
I'd vote for you.

And want to read about the lurid details of your cocaine fuelled sex life.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:39, Reply)

I've crapped on more rent boys than Mark Oaten's had hot dinners.

( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:41, Reply)

That's a lot of crap coated rent boys.
What has a rent boy in every bite?
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:42, Reply)

This is very Topic-al. Ho ho.

( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:49, Reply)

each case will turn on its own facts
if a judge doesn't want to find for it, he will find a reason not to...
( rachelswipe with a fork, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:42, Reply)

This phrase covers the entirety of the civil and criminal justice systems.

(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 16:43, Reply)

yup!

( rachelswipe with a fork, Tue 26 Apr 2011, 17:11, Reply)