An unnamed celebrity’s attempt to block publication of ‘serious allegations’ over exploitative sexual behaviour including ‘potential criminal activity’ was dismissed by the High Court today.
The Guardian and ITN propose publishing material gathered about the conduct of 'PPT' over a period of years. This includes ‘alleged abuse of…power and status as a well-known public figure in order to establish contact with young women who were also considerably younger than him, and engage, and/or seek to engage in inappropriate sexual activity, including potential criminal activity’.
PPT sought a permanent injunction arguing that publication of the allegations, which he denies, would cause ‘a serious deterioration in his mental health, including serious attempts to take his own life and the need for psychiatric treatment’. Citing Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, he said ‘publication would expose him to a real and immediate risk of serious harm or death’.
In judgment, Mr Justice Nicklin said ‘a decision permitting publication, the anticipation of publication and publication itself would each materially increase the claimant’s risk of suicide’ and the increase ‘would be very substantial’. However the proposed publications ‘are not the sole cause of the claimant’s psychiatric condition or suicidality. Nor are they the only source of his present distress’.
He added: ‘The prospect of publication is a specific and powerful anticipated trigger. An injunction would remove that particular trigger for so long as the restraint remained effective. It would not treat the underlying psychiatric condition, remove the claimant’s elevated baseline risk or prevent deterioration arising from other significant stressors.’
The judge said the state has assumed responsibility for the celebrity’s immediate safety ‘through the psychiatric hospital and mental-health services’ adding: ‘The court has not assumed responsibility for the claimant’s psychiatric treatment or safety in the relevant sense. Nor does its adjudication of the dispute transform the defendants’ publication into an act of the state.
‘The fact that the court can prevent the trigger, while the hospital cannot, does not itself transfer to the court responsibility for the risk or establish that Article 2 requires the trigger to be prohibited.’
The claim under Article 3 was dismissed ‘for substantially the same reasons'. The judge found ‘even apart from the limits of the positive operational obligations, the court’s general equitable power does not provide a proper basis for granting the injunction sought’.
He added: ‘In all the circumstances, the treatment, containment and risk-management measures available through the psychiatric services provide the reasonable and institutionally appropriate response required of the state. The positive operational obligations do not require the additional and materially different measure of prohibiting the defendants’ proposed publications.’
The claim under Article 8 was also rejected, ‘principally because the claimant has not identified a proper domestic juridical basis for the injunction sought’. The injunction sought 'would constitute an exceptionally serious interference with the rights engaged on the other side’. Article 8, he said, 'does not require the court to eliminate every source of psychiatric distress by imposing a prior restraint upon the lawful activities of private parties'.
Permission to appeal was applied for ‘in the unusual circumstances’ that the claimant’s counsel could not obtain instructions or formulate grounds of appeal. In an ex-tempore judgment, Mr Justice Nicklin said: ‘Nevertheless, I grant permission to appeal…because I am satisfied there is compelling reason for an appeal to be heard. The judgment determines important questions concerning the scope of positive obligations under Article 2 and 3.’
The anonymity order remains in place.
Sara Mansoori KC, Ian Helme and Mannat Malhi, instructed by Russells, appeared for PPT; Gavin Millar KC and Ben Silverstone, instructed by Wiggin LLP, for ITN and Guardian News and Media.
