Video recording on social media not to be restrained by injunction

By: Mark Tottenham BL

or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments

High Court refuses to grant an interlocutory order restraining or prohibiting the publication of a video recording on social media, where the plaintiff was linked to the sale of a 'miracle mineral solution', on the grounds that such an order should only be made in the clearest cases, and that it would not be unreasonable for a jury to determine that the video recording was not defamatory of the plaintiff.

Application for injunction - video posted on social media - whether video recording was defamatory - defamation proceedings - interlocutory application - connection between 'sovereign movement' and sale of 'MMS' - "miracle mineral solution" - sovereign movement being a fringe group who reject the law of the state - allegation that plaintiff preyed on vulnerable people - s. 33(1) of the Defamation Act, 2009 - order prohibiting publication - whether any defence to the action that was likely to succeed - whether any difference between an 'opinion' of the court and a 'finding' of the court.

Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.

or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *