判决理由
An injunction restraining publication of private information can be maintained even after the information has been published abroad and is widely available online, because publication in a national newspaper would cause additional harm through the 'hardcopy' factor and the intrusion into private life under Article 8 ECHR.
事实
PJS, a public figure, sought an injunction to prevent publication of a story about his sexual encounters. The information had already been published in the US and was widely available on social media and the internet.
判决摘要
The Supreme Court (4-1) held that the injunction should remain in place. Publication in a national newspaper would cause additional and qualitatively different harm. The Article 8 right to privacy can outweigh Article 10 freedom of expression even where information is available elsewhere.
关键引述
"Publication in hard copy in a national newspaper has a different and more enduring impact than digital publication."
— Lord Mance
后续处理
Applied in subsequent privacy injunction cases involving social media publication.