Pippa Middleton James Matthews v Person Unknown or Persons Unknown (Defendant(s)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mrs Justice Whipple |
| Judgment Date | 28 September 2016 |
| Neutral Citation | [2016] EWHC 2354 (QB) |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
| Docket Number | Case No: HQ16X03369 |
| Date | 28 September 2016 |
[2016] EWHC 2354 (QB)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Mrs Justice Whipple
Case No: HQ16X03369
Mr Adam Wolanski (instructed by Farrer and Co) for the Claimants
The Defendant(s) did not appear and were not represented in Court
Hearing dates: 28 September 2016
Approved Judgment
I direct that pursuant to CPR PD 39A para 6.1 no official shorthand note shall be taken of this Judgment and that copies of this version as handed down may be treated as authentic.
Background
On 24 September 2016, Dove J granted an interim injunction preventing the use publication or disclosure of material defined at Schedule 1 to his order. Schedule 1 listed photographs which were derived from or suspected on reasonable grounds to derive from the iCloud account of the First Claimant. Dove J listed the return date for that injunction for today.
At today's hearing, the Claimants sought a continuation of the interim injunction pending trial or further order of the Court. They also sought to broaden the terms of the injunction to encompass, in addition to photographs, "any other information" which is or might derive from the iCloud account of the First Claimant.
I granted the Claimants' application and made the order in the terms in which it was sought. By my order, the injunction will remain in place until trial or further order of this Court.
My order provides that the Defendant(s) must not use, publish, offer for sale or disclose to any other person (other than (i) by way of disclosure to legal advisers instructed in relation to these proceedings (the Defendants' legal advisers) for the purpose of obtaining legal advice in relation to these proceedings or (ii) for the purpose of carrying this Order into effect) all or any part of the information referred to in Schedule 1 to the Order.
Schedule 1 encompasses photographs or any other information which is derived from, or which there are grounds to suspect may derive from, the iCloud account of the First Claimant (the "Information").
The order contains other provisions and imposes other obligations on the Defendant(s) too. I do not need to set them all out here. The important feature of my order is the prohibition I have imposed on use, publication, sale or disclosure of the Information.
These are my reasons for making the order.
Recent Developments
Dove J's order was made on an urgent ex parte basis, the application having been filed outside of court hours, as soon as it became known that the First Claimant's iCloud account had been unlawfully accessed.
Since then, the Claimants have issued a Claim Form. It is dated 27 September 2016. By that Claim Form, the Claimants seek injunctive relief on a permanent basis, as well as various ancillary orders.
The following causes of action are pleaded in the Claim Form and draft Particulars of Claim which I have been shown (the Particulars remain in draft, because the formulation of the claim may change in some details as a result of the related police investigation):
a) Misuse of private information
b) Breach of confidence
c) Infringement of copyright
d) Breach of statutory obligations owed under the Data Protection Act 1998.
The Claimants have filed witness statements in support of this application from:
a) Alan Kilkenny dated 26 September 2016. He is the Claimants' communications advisor; and
b) The First Claimant (that witness statement is currently undated, but Mr Wolanksi who appears for the Claimants has provided an undertaking to the Court to lodge a signed and dated version by the close of business today).
The facts
The evidence filed by the Claimants makes clear that:
a) Someone has apparently accessed the First Claimant's iCloud account and the material held on it.
b) Photographs held on that iCloud account have been offered for sale to the national press.
c) The person(s) offering the photographs for sale has / have sought to avoid being identified. He or she has, or they have, communicated with the press in ways which are designed to be untraceable.
d) The photographs which have been offered for sale are personal to the Claimants. They include photographs of family, friends and places of personal importance.
e) Neither Claimant gave permission for those photographs – or any other material stored on the First Claimant's icloud account – to be accessed in this way, disseminated, published, or sold.
The First Claimant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cameron v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd
...[2016] 4 WLR 69 and Smith v Unknown Defendant Pseudonym “Likeicare” [2016] EWHC 1775 (QB) (defamation); Middleton v Person Unknown [2016] EWHC 2354 (QB) (theft of information by hackers); PML v Persons Unknown [2018] EWHC 703 (QB) (hacking and blackmail); CMOC v Persons Unknown [2017] EW......
-
Birmingham City Council v Mr Shakeel Afsar
...to claims against persons unknown: see TUV v Person or Persons Unknown [2010] EWHC 853 (QB), Middleton v Person or Persons Unknown [2016] EWHC 2354 (QB), Kerner v WX [2015] EWHC 1247 (QB), the notes in the White Book 2019 at para. 19.1.3, and Ansco Arena Limited v Law and Others [2019] ......
-
ZSCHIMMER & SCHWARZ GMBH & CO. KG CHEMISCHE FABRIKEN vs PERSONS UNKNOWN
...Pseudonym ‘Likeicare’ [2016] EWHC 1775 (QB), [2016] All ER (D) 224 (Jul) (defamation); Middleton v Person Unknown or Persons Unknown [2016] EWHC 2354 (QB), [2016] All ER (D) 85 (Sep) (theft of information by hackers); PML v Person(s) Unknown [2018] EWHC 838 (QB) (hacking and blackmail); CMO......