Super or Hyper Injunctions (contra mundum), or Gagging orders are slang terms for court orders that prevent a party from doing something.
This is a good summary taken from lawblacks:
"An Injunction is an Order of the Court which requires a party to do or refrain from doing a certain act. Injunctions are imposed at the discretion of the Court where it is just and convenient to do so and where there is a serious issue to be tried. The Court will not grant an Injunction where damages would be an appropriate alternative.
There are three types of Injunction:-
Mandatory – requires a specific act to be done e.g. “you must remove that obstruction”
Prohibitory – requires a party to stop doing a specific act e.g. “you must not publish the libellous article”
Quia Timet – requires a party to act to prevent harm occurring in the future
Injunctions can be obtained at any time, including before proceedings have started or after a Judgment has been given. Injunctions can be obtained without notice to the other party if there are good reasons for this e.g. extreme urgency or a need of secrecy. Injunctions are remedies, not causes of action. Therefore, you cannot sue for an Injunction.
The Court will decide whether to grant an Injunction based on the Balance of Convenience test. The Court will weigh the interests of both parties and if one party would be unduly harmed by the making of an Injunction, the Court will refuse the Application."
This is what wikipedia says:
"is an order, sometimes a legal order by a court or government, other times a private order by an employer or other institution, restricting information or comment from being made public."
Another source is gillhams.
The UK has been a country renowned for its freedom of speech and the best investigative journalism in the world. When 9/11 occurred, Americans went to UK based news organizations because they are trusted. But not anymore.
It has all got so much worse since the Human Rights Act 1998 and reference to the the Spycatcher case in 1987.
Although historically injunctions have been used to protect national interests and witnesses, celebrities are paying £50k to lawyers like Carter Ruck to stop media outlets reporting on their misdemeanors. This seems hypocritical when celebrities can milk the media and sell themselves to OK! magazine and then stop publication of often true events that may or may not be in the public interest. If a celebrity wins "Father of the Year" and is beating his wife, surely we should be allowed to know.
For a detailed analysis of a real injunction, read this Guardian article: