Who is mystery businessman at heart of Telegraph’s #MeToo expose?
Court of Appeal stops newspaper publishing findings of eight-month investigation into harassment claims
A leading British businessman has won a legal battle in the Court of Appeal to prevent The Daily Telegraph naming him as part of an investigation into harassment.
The newspaper spent eight months investigating allegations of racial abuse, intimidation and sexual harassment made against the businessman by five of his staff members.
All five had been silenced with “settlement agreements” under which they received “substantial payments”, otherwise known as non-disclosure agreements, or NDAs.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
The Telegraph draws parallels with Harvey Weinstein’s use of NDAs to pay off accusers, and says that publishing the allegations against the British businessman would “be sure to reignite the #MeToo movement against the mistreatment of women, minorities and others by powerful employers”.
But after the paper contacted the accused boss for comment in July, he and a number of his senior staff applied for an injunction to stop the details being published - a request granted by three Court of Appeal judges on Tuesday.
The decision comes after a High Court judge refused to grant the gagging order in August. The Court of Appeal disagreed with the prior verdict, arguing that the staff making the allegations had been “compromised” by the settlement deals.
However, lawyers have pointed out that the latest court ruling says the injunction is an “interim injunction” that preserves “confidentiality pending a full trial”. In essence, this means the “legal process is not over”, tweets the author and lawyer known as The Secret Barrister.
The issue is further complicated by the fact that “two of the staff who made the accusations against the businessman supported the injunction”, says the BBC’s Clive Coleman.
“This may seem odd but it’s not unusual, as some people, even victims, don’t want a problem at work to follow them afterwards,” he adds.
Telegraph editor Chris Evans has argued that the public “have a right to know when the powerful seek to gag the vulnerable”.
According to Buzzfeed News’ Mark Di Stefano, Evans emailed staff at the paper last night vowing to fight the court order, saying: “We think it is overwhelmingly in the public interest that this story of ours be told and we are confident that, eventually, we will overturn the injunction.”
The ruling renders it illegal to disclose the businessman’s identity or that of his businesses, how much he paid his accusers, and the nature of the allegations.
But, his identity could be revealed in Parliament thanks to parliamentary privilege, which grants MPs certain legal immunities from being sued over what they say in the House.
Labour MP Jess Phillips hinted at this possibility in a tweet last night.
Although Phillips did not name the individual during Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday, she did ask Theresa May whether she thought the injunction was a problem.
The prime minister replied that while she could not discuss the specific case, she agreed that “there is a wider problem with the use of non-disclosure agreements to keep people quiet”.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
7 beautiful towns to visit in Switzerland during the holidays
The Week Recommends Find bliss in these charming Swiss locales that blend the traditional with the modern
By Catherine Garcia, The Week US Published
-
The Week contest: Werewolf bill
Puzzles and Quizzes
By The Week US Published
-
'This needs to be a bigger deal'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
Jaguar's stalled rebrand
In the spotlight Critics and car lovers are baffled by the luxury car company's 'complete reset'
By Abby Wilson Published
-
Giant TVs are becoming the next big retail commodity
Under the Radar Some manufacturers are introducing TVs over 8 feet long
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
Why are America's restaurant chains going bankrupt?
Today's Big Question Red Lobster was the first. TGI Fridays might be next.
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
Boeing machinists reject deal, continue strike
Speed Read The rejection came the same day Boeing reported a $6.2 billion quarterly loss
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Why do Russian oil bosses keep dying?
Under the Radar There have been 'at least 50' mysterious deaths of energy company executives since Putin ordered Ukraine invasion
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The pros and cons of globalization
Pros and Cons Globalization can promote economic prosperity but also be exploitative
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
The pros and cons of labor unions
Pros and Cons Joining a labor union can have positives — and negatives
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
Boar's Head plant closure leaves another small town looking for answers
The Explainer The Jarratt, Virginia, Boar's Head plant has been shuttered indefinitely after a listeria outbreak
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published