Abstract While freedom of expression has a long and well-established constitutional foundation as a self-governing concept, the right to privacy is a relatively recent norm in the constitutional orientation of the United Kingdom. Until the Human Rights Act 1998, the right to privacy had little standing constitutionally. Following on from this standard-setting, notably, both rights have taken on added importance in our modern technological society. Nevertheless, the formulation of privacy into a legal doctrine of human rights seems to have presented a fundamental tension in relation to freedom of expression. As a matter of legal logic, the courts, through a consideration of the law, examine the substantive legal issues in terms of a balancing process, whereby the interest in privacy is balanced against the interest in freedom of expression. It is a matter of broad principle for the courts to rely on injunctions as ancillary instruments of equity in doing justice in this field. Significantly, while the elementary norm of an injunction is that it commands an act that the court regards as an essential constituent to justice, unfortunately, many contend that judges have gone beyond this point, and this is shifting opinions. In fact, serious concerns have been frequently expressed about the extent to which the rich are easily able to invoke the discretion of the court to grant injunctions in a fashion that remains an antithesis to the principle of open justice and also undermines the exercise of freedom of speech. While this suspicion is not entirely new to matters of procedural law, the recent case, PJS v News Group Newspapers turned on this controversy. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to examine the complexity of celebrity privacy injunctions in the age of the internet and question its relevance, as we outline the extent to which social media is challenging the authority of the state (judiciary) in this direction.

中文翻译：

---

社交媒体是否在挑战司法机构的权威？重新思考互联网时代匿名和超级禁令的有效性

摘要尽管言论自由作为一个自治概念具有悠久而完善的宪法基础，但隐私权是英国宪法取向中相对较新的规范。在1998年《人权法》颁布之前，隐私权在宪法上几乎没有地位。继此标准制定之后，在现代技术社会中，两项权利都变得越来越重要。然而，将隐私纳入人权的法律学说似乎在表达自由方面引起了根本性的紧张。作为法律逻辑问题，法院通过考虑法律，从平衡过程的角度审查实质性法律问题，从而平衡了隐私权和表达自由权之间的利益。法院在这一领域的司法公正中依靠禁令作为公平的辅助手段是一个广泛的原则问题。值得注意的是，尽管强制令的基本规范要求法院将其视为正义的基本组成部分，但不幸的是，许多人认为法官已经超越了这一点，这正在改变观点。实际上，人们经常对富人在多大程度上能够轻易诉诸法院的酌处权以某种方式发出禁令表示严重关切，而这种方式仍然与公开司法的原则背道而驰，也破坏了行使自由的权利。言语。尽管这种怀疑在程序法问题上并非完全陌生，但最近的案例PJS v News Group Newspapers引发了这一争议。因此，