What should "Super Injunctions" be available for?

  wee eddie 14:05 24 May 2011

That should be the question.

Should they be, to keep secret that you have been "Two Timing" your partner.

I think not.

Should they be to hide the fact that you have been dumping "Toxic Waste" in Africa.

I think not.

I think that the "Judiciary" needs to get it's own House in order before they start criticising us.

  interzone55 14:24 24 May 2011

The only things that a super-injunction should be used for are already covered by the DA Notice system

By the way, after much legal wrangling the Grauniad managed to overturn the super-injunction taken out by Trafigura to cover up their dumping of waste at Ivory Coast

  oresome 14:25 24 May 2011

The Judiciary uphold laws passed by Parliament.

Now it may be that some laws have unintended consequences, in which case it's up to the parliamentarians to make ammendments.

However the speed and global nature of communications coupled with differing laws and attitudes in each country make enforcement of any national law difficult to say the least.

  wee eddie 14:37 24 May 2011

I always thought that Judges were appointed because of their intellegence and consider that the Judiciary should be expected to use it's collective brain power, when applying the Law of the Land. Were such instances to happen in a Classroom situation, they would be adjudged to be Dumb Insolence.

The two examples that I have chosen have been made because of Judicial Nitpicking and not because of the law, as it was intended.

  johndrew 14:44 24 May 2011

I thought 'Super Injunctions' were specifically designed to enable those with enough money to protect their good names from being smeared by their disgraceful actions.

But perhaps those who know better will put me right ;-))

  spuds 15:23 24 May 2011

"protect their good names from being smeared by their disgraceful actions"

What kicking a football and perhaps representing England?.

  bremner 16:27 24 May 2011


"What kicking a football and perhaps representing Wales" i think you mean ;o)

  wee eddie 16:52 24 May 2011

Alan14; and I thought that Private Eye had something to do with it!

  interzone55 17:26 24 May 2011

wee eddie

They may have, I've only recently started reading Private Eye again after a while, but did take the Guardian during the Trafigura situation, so I'm only aware for their input.

By the way, I think Trafigura were the first people to apply for a super-injunction, unless someone knows otherwise. I'd be interested in knowing if Carter Ruck were the first law firm to use one to protect the public from knowing just how shady some people are...

  bremner 19:34 24 May 2011

The Times today reports that it was Shillings in 2001 representing Naomi Campbell that opened the door for celebrity injunctions.

However it seems that it was Carter Ruck reprenting Trafigura in 2009 that led to the phrase superinjuction.

  wee eddie 19:50 24 May 2011

It is my belief that there should be a Commons Committee to view "all" Super-Injunctions and, if there is even a hint of another Trafigura in there, then Judicial heads should roll.

To me, the Trafigura Scandal was a disgrace to this Country of ours and, if there are any more such items, they should be made public immediately.

It would not surprise me if our Armed Forces were not sitting on one, or two, their purchasing deals have been somewhat less than transparent of late.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Samsung Galaxy A8 review: Hands-on

Majority of illustrators don’t earn enough to live from, new survey shows

iPhone X problems

Word gratuit : comment télécharger le logiciel de Microsoft ?