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)