Friday, May 27, 2011

Good injunctions, Bad injunctions


As you know an injunction is an Order of the Court which requires a party to do or refrain from doing a certain act. The Court will not grant an Injunction where damages would be an appropriate alternative.

The tittle-tattle-gag-and-shag injunction outings over the past few weeks have highlighted the mess the UK privacy laws are in. Were they appropriate? Is it a win-win situation or are those being gagged (Helen Wood and Imogen Thomas for example) blameless victims whose human rights have been violated?

Whilst a debate is ensuing, we should look at where injunctions are used appropriately.

There are many occasions when an injunction is required to protect human beings from being hurt or killed and domestic violence is one where an injunction provides a short term remedy before criminal proceedings are taken.

http://www.womensaid.org.uk/domestic-violence-survivors-handbook.asp?section=000100010008000100330002

Protecting one's career like Goodwin, Giggs, Terry, Marr etc is not the same as protecting oneself from a violent person and these Celebs should spend their money on supporting those in society who cannot afford Twopence-Ruck LLP instead of wasting the Court's time on injunctions to cover up misdeeds.

6 comments:

  1. I don't think anyone could in good faith refer to anyone engaging in kiss-and-tell as a "blameless victim".

    ReplyDelete
  2. Oh SOooo moral.Ick.

    ReplyDelete
  3. There are only three reasons why injunctions should be given: National security, Gross invasion of privacy (I'm talking phone hacking, house breaking, etc.) and personal safety (so, domestic violence as mentioned in this post, plus witness protection and the like)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Agree, privacy should not be afforded to adulterer's or criminals....what about equity??

    ReplyDelete
  5. The fact remains that Giggs used cash to manipulate the legal system in order to prevent his wife having ammunition against him should she decide to sue for divorce (and God only knows why she shouldn't divorce this 10th-rate wanker). Both Ferguson, who condoned it, and Mistah Justice "Giss a grand Giggs" Eady should be totally ashamed of themselves ... but what the hell - both of them should be in home for the elderly and infirm.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Please remember that privacy laws were invented by the FAMILY COURTS to protect child snatching. Stephen Glover got it right in the Daily Mail http://bit.ly/ka6K5B and the Independent in its Untold story of gagging orders: http://bit.ly/kPhKRn

    http://victims-unite.net
    http://vickyhaigh.wordpress.com

    ReplyDelete