Who among us has never inadvertently stumbled into a brothel? Exactly. Sadly, when it happened to then singleton television presenter Jamie Theakston, some of the staff took unauthorised photographs of him and there was a smack of blackmail in the air. He sued to prevent publication of the story and accompanying photographs. He failed on the first limb but succeeded on the second.
Mr Justice Ouseley at para [22] of his judgment in Theakston v MGN Ltd (2002) EWHC 137 (QB) said: ‘It is surprising that it was not apparent to the claimant on his first arrival that he was in a brothel and that that only became apparent, on his later return and after he had engaged in sexual activities.’
It was shortly after this that the super-injunction emerged. The ‘super’ element restrained publication of the fact that an injunction had even been secured. The ever-excellent Lord Neuberger chaired a committee
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=16d9dd3d_1)
