American Legal Publishing Corporation provides these documents for informational purposes only. These documents should not be relied upon as the definitive authority for local legislation.
Additionally, the formatting and pagination of the posted documents varies from the formatting and pagination of the official copy. The official printed copy of a Code of Ordinances should be consulted prior to any action being taken. For further information regarding the official version of any of this Code of Ordinances or other documents posted on this site, please contact the Municipality directly or contact American Legal Publishing toll-free at Search Login.
They failed to persuade the high court judge at that time but were granted an interim injunction allowing them to appeal against the decision to the higher court. There is a conflict of evidence as to whether they met through a mutual friend or on Facebook. The claimant and AB had occasional sexual encounters starting in AB said that CD was.
Accordingly, the three met for a three-way sexual encounter which they duly carried out. After that encounter, the sexual relationship between the claimant and AB came to an end, but they remained friends.
The injunction barring the publication of names remains pending a Court of Appeal verdict. A US magazine that named PJS, the celebrity who took out an injunction to cover-up an extra-marital threesome, has named another star trying to gag the press. The "world-famous singer" was granted anonymity last year after being accused of sexually harassing his hairdresser during an employment tribunal, which was later settled out of court, says the Daily Telegraph.
The injunction was overturned, but the star, referred to as RA, has been given the go-ahead to take his case to the Court of Appeal, according to the Judicial Office, which means he cannot be named in England and Wales.
The US magazine, which also cannot be named, says it "refuses to be silenced" and is publishing RA's name this week. In what the Telegraph describes as a "landmark ruling that threatens to open the gates to a flood of gagging writs for the rich and famous", judges said readers in the UK had no right to know about the sex lives of celebrities. Twitter has issued a warning to users involved in naming the mystery celebrity who won an injunction to cover up an extra-marital threesome.
An email from Twitter's legal team was sent to users who had identified the married star, who can only be referred to PJS in England and Wales. The partner, known only as YMA, cannot be named either, although both celebrities have been widely identified across social media and in the foreign press.
The warning came hours after yesterday 's Supreme Court decision to uphold the privacy injunction in a case that tested freedom of the press and privacy laws in the digital age. The social media giant did not "explicitly" ask users to delete the tweets, but it "hints that there could be consequences for not doing so," says The Guardian , which has seen the email.
The email reads: "The complainant requests that the following tweet, allegedly in violation of local law in the UK, be removed immediately from your account. Please confirm whether you will voluntarily comply with the request. It indicates a "concerted effort" by the social media giant to get the tweets removed in the wake of the ruling, says the newspaper. The Sun on Sunday, which has been seeking to publish the story since January, has argued that the injunction is essentially pointless because the celebrities involved have been so widely named.
But senior judges yesterday ruled that the injunction still held and there is no public interest in "kiss and tell" stories or "criticisms of private sexual conduct". However, some legal experts warn that the ruling has created "a de-facto privacy law in the UK by definitively placing the privacy of a celebrity above the public's right to know," says the Daily Telegraph.
The Supreme Court has ruled that publications in England and Wales cannot name a celebrity who had an extra-marital threesome. The married star, known only as PJS, secured a privacy injunction to protect his identity after the Sun on Sunday newspaper attempted to print the story in January.
Although the Court of Appeal said the ban should be lifted last month, PJS has now successfully appealed against this decision, with senior judges ruling that there is no public interest in "kiss and tell stories".
The identities of PJS and his partner, known as YMA in England and Wales, have been revealed in publications across the world, including in Scotland, and on social media.
But lawyers for the celebrity couple said that identifying them in the English press would be devastating for their children. Delivering today's page ruling, Lord Mance said: "There is no public interest however much it may be of interest to some members of the public in publishing kiss-and-tell stories or criticisms of private sexual conduct, simply because the persons involved are well-known; and so there is no right to invade privacy by publishing them.
The "facts" of the case were outlined in the Court of Appeal ruling last month: Lord Justice Jackson said PJS had met someone, referred to only as AB, around eight years ago, although there was a dispute about whether they had met through a mutual friend or on Facebook. PJS and AB had "occasional sexual encounters" starting in , according to the ruling.
0コメント