ABSTRACT

Injunctions are a contentious issue between the judiciary and the press. What the press wishes to publish has sometimes been restricted by the judiciary through the issuing of injunctions. Nonetheless, there have been instances in which injunctions have not been respected. First, members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords have used parliamentary privilege to name individuals. The development of technology also means that information travels quicker and without the hindrance of borders. As a consequence, the second way in which injunctions can be undermined is by information being published in other jurisdictions. Thirdly, identities can be revealed on social media. This article states that, despite these instances undermining injunctions, they are still valuable. This is due to their changing nature from protecting secrets to protecting individuals from intrusion and therefore there is still value in injunctions remaining in place to protect public figures from media frenzies.

摘要

禁令是司法机构和新闻界之间有争议的问题。新闻界希望发布的内容有时会受到司法机构发布禁令的限制。尽管如此，还是有禁令没有得到遵守的情况。首先，下议院和上议院的成员利用议会特权来命名个人。技术的发展也意味着信息的传播更快，不受国界的限制。因此，可以破坏禁令的第二种方式是在其他司法管辖区发布信息。第三，可以在社交媒体上公开身份。本文指出，尽管这些实例破坏了禁令，但它们仍然很有价值。