This week’s superinjunction news

Radio Times provides some timely legal advice for TV viewers


Unsavoury act alleged


Unfortunately we can’t tell you what it is, or who was involved, or say anything about it. We just wanted to warn you not to mention it to your MP, because chances are he’s done something similar and might get the wrong idea.

Denial of alleged act alluded to

If you were to suddenly stop tuning in to Springwatch for no reason, a certain judge might get the idea that you knew something about one of the presenters you weren’t supposed to know, which could land you in court. Conversely, if you never watch the show but suddenly started because of this warning, you might be in technical violation of an injunction that makes certain types of curiosity illegal. Best to keep a log of your viewing habits for the next three to six months, just in case.

Rooney may be barred from Twitter

In an unprecedented legal move, lawyers acting for Manchester United footballer Wayne Rooney are seeking to prevent their own client from using his Twitter account, because they don’t think he really understands what it is or how it works. There is no need for you to know about the pending injunction unless you are Wayne Rooney, in which case you shouldn’t be reading this.

Non-denial not denied

When we said Springwatch before, that was just an example. It could be Springwatch, or any other spring-related BBC programme. Or not. Honestly, we’ve told you too much already.

Superinjunction erased


A judge has ruled that superinjunctions do not exist, as part of a superinjunction that effectively denies itself. The move erases a former superinjunction issued to spare the blushes of someone who used to be on Coronation Street, and who now has no official identity and cannot be named in connection with anything. But you know who we mean.