Anonymous celebrity loses UK court bid to block reports of alleged sexual misconduct

An unidentified celebrity has lost a bid for a UK court injunction to block two news organisations from publishing sexual misconduct allegations against him.

Lawyers for Independent Television News (ITN) and the Guardian newspaper’s publisher told the High Court last month that the allegations they wanted to publish were about the man’s “abuse of power and status” and his attempts to contact a number of young women to engage them in “inappropriate sexual activity.”

The celebrity denies wrongdoing and has repeatedly said he intended to take his own life if the allegations were published, according to the judgment.

The man's lawyer, Sara Mansoori, earlier told the court that he had made a suicide attempt when he received letters from ITN and Guardian News and Media seeking his response to the allegations.

He later made another attempt, she said, and he was recently admitted to hospital for psychiatric care.

The case has drawn widespread attention in Britain because it highlights questions over public figures' right to privacy and what media can report on the basis of public interest.

Gavin Millar, representing the media companies, has said that the allegations were gathered after “a wide-ranging and rigorous investigation” and that there was a strong public interest in publishing them.

Read more

US midterms LIVE: First polls close; Exit polls show bad news for Republicans; Trump rages as results come in

“The defendants allege that, over a period of years, the claimant used his status and influence as a well-known public figure to establish contact with young women, some considerably younger than him, and that he engaged or sought to engage in seriously inappropriate conduct,” according to a summary of Tuesday’s (Wednesday AEDT) judgment.

Some of the alleged conduct could amount to criminal offences if proven, it said.

Justice Matthew Nicklin dismissed the man's injunction bid, saying the legal measure would mean “an exceptionally serious interference” with the rights of the media companies.

He noted that the man has a “serious and longstanding psychiatric vulnerability" which must be taken seriously, and said a decision allowing the allegations to be published will substantially increase his risk of suicide.

However, he added that the evidence does not “establish that suicide is inevitable”.

Read more

Canva announces restructure as 22 per cent of workforce impacted

The man’s statements are “not a reliable basis for concluding that no future treatment or intervention could alter that risk”, the judge said.

He ruled that the man should remain anonymous to allow him to appeal the ruling.

Reporters Without Borders UK welcomed the court decision, saying the remaining restrictions should be lifted.

"While the risks of harm in this case of course must be taken seriously, it is important that responsible journalism in the public interest is allowed to proceed," the nonprofit said in a statement.

“Dangerous precedents can have impacts far beyond the cases that set them, and neither wealth nor access to the best legal teams should ever shield anyone from legitimate public scrutiny.”

Support is available from the National Sexual Assault, Domestic and Family Violence Counselling Service at 1800RESPECT (1800 737 732).

Lifeline 13 11 14