Naming the celebrity protected by a privacy injunction would be “devastating” for his children, London’s Supreme Court has heard.
The Sun on Sunday wants to publish details of the man’s alleged “extramarital activities”. His lawyers are now asking Supreme Court justices to make a decision in the case.
The man, named in court rulings as PJS, was told this afternoon he will have to wait to find out if he has won the legal challenge to keep the injunction in place, after the Court of Appeal ruled it should be overturned. A panel of five justices reserved their decision in the case on Thursday following a hearing in London.
Supreme Court president Lord Neuberger said the court would “take time to consider this matter” and justices would give their decision “as soon as we can”. The injunction remains in place until a decision is reached.
Lawyers for the Sun on Sunday argue the order should be overturned because PJS and his spouse have been named in publications outside of England and Wales, where the order is in place.
But Desmond Browne QC, representing PJS, said lifting the injunction would prompt a flood of reports which would affect the couple’s children. “It’s hard to see that the children were afforded the primacy of importance to which they are entitled,” he told justices.
Mr Browne said there was a need to protect the children from harassment and increased attention from the media. “That is an issue not just now but for the future when they grow up.”
Discharging the order would have “devastating consequences”.
“This case has been hailed by some as the death-knell of the privacy injunction," he later added. "We hope that reports of its death have been greatly exaggerated.”
Additional reporting by Press Association
