Judgment in Tooley v Times Media Ltd

On 23 March 2026, Mrs Justice Steyn DBE handed down judgment in respect of Cynthia Nkiruka Tooley MBE’s applications for an interim injunction and for Norwich Pharmacal relief against TML.

The subject of the underlying proceedings and the applications was an article that had been published by TML on 8 February 2025. The claim, as originally issued, was for defamation and malicious falsehood, however the claim was subsequently amended to introduce misuse of private information and breach of confidence as the primary causes of action. Accordingly, the Claimant sought to amend the injunction application as one primarily grounded in misuse of private information and breach of confidence by way of an amendment application.

The Claimant’s applications were dismissed following a hearing on 19 March 2026. In her judgment, Mrs Justice Steyn DBE held that:

• It was clear that the essential purpose of the application for an interim injunction was to protect the Claimant’s reputation, not her private information [29] – [30], and the rule in Bonnard v Perryman therefore applied [35].
• Pursuant to the rule in Bonnard v Perryman, the interim injunction application failed on the basis that the statements complained of were not unarguably defamatory of the Claimant and/or were defensible as true [40] – [44].
• The necessity requirement for obtaining Norwich Pharmacal relief had not been met [68] – [72], and it was not necessary or proportionate to grant the order sought in all the circumstances, which included the finding that the Claimant had offered no compelling reason for why the strong protection against disclosure of journalistic sources should be displaced [73] – [79].

Katya Pereira acted for the Defendant, instructed by Bristows LLP.

The judgment can be found here.