Following an extraordinary attempt by lawyers Carter-Ruck to stop the Guardian reporting a parliamentary question, due to an existing ‘super-injunction,’ this came from the Guardian’s editor, Alan Rusbridger last night:
“Full circle… How the #Guardian is reporting #Trafigura own goal tonight http://tinyurl.com/yl4quac”
- Rusbridger talks about the case at this link: “This just shows if you use the law in a clumsy way it’s a fantastic PR own goal.”
- This morning’s Guardian editorial addresses the issue of the ‘super-injuction’:
“That media organisations were unable to report a parliamentary question was due to a so-called ‘super-injunction’ obtained by the notorious law firm Carter-Ruck on behalf of Trafigura, a large London-based trading company. A ‘super-injunction’ is one which not only prevents any publication, but which is itself secret. Search in vain for the case in the court lists of the high court in London: it appears only as ‘RJW and SJW v The Guardian’. Under its terms, the Guardian was prevented from publishing a certain document: it was also banned from revealing that Trafigura had been to court to obtain an injunction. When we became aware that the existence of this order had been mentioned in a parliamentary question we sought to vary the terms of the injunction. We were advised by Carter-Ruck that publication would place us in contempt of court.”
- See BBC Newsnight’s report from last night here, linked at relevant point: http://bbc.co.uk/i/ndt7t/
What do you think about so-called ‘super-injunctions’? Let us know: via @journalismnews, in the comments, or via judith or laura [at] journalism.co.uk.
Super-Injunctions are an anathema to democracy, a gross affront to to the people of the UK, and should have ended for all time with the fall of the Nazi’s
I dare say though that with this secretive government of surveillance and control they will flourish ….