FTP -v- Independent Television News and Guardian News & Media (anonymity and reporting restrictions order)

High CourtKing's Bench DivisionMedia and Communications ListAnonymity Order

Claim number: KB-2026-002854

In the High Court of Justice
King’s Bench Division
Media and Communications List

10 August 2026

Before:

The Hon. Mr Justice Mould

Between:

FTP
(Claimant/Applicant)

-v-

(1) Independent Television News Limited
(2) Guardian News and Media Limited
(Defendants)

Anonymity and reporting restrictions order

UPON READING the Claim Form, the Claimant’s Application Notice dated 31 July 2026, and the supporting evidence set out in the Confidential Schedule to this Order

AND UPON consideration of the rights of the Claimant and it appearing for the reasons given in the Confidential Schedule that non-disclosure of the identity of the Claimant is necessary to secure the proper administration of justice and in order to protect the interests of the Claimant and that there is no sufficient countervailing public interest in disclosure

AND UPON the application of the Claimant dated 31 July 2026 which has now been pursued on an urgent basis (“Application”)

AND UPON the Court being satisfied that the circumstances now justify the application being pursued on an urgent basis

AND PURSUANT to section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998; section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981; CPR rules 5.4C, 5.4D and 39.2(4); and/or the inherent jurisdiction of the court

WHEREAS for the purposes of this order:

(i) ‘Publication’ includes any speech, writing, broadcast, or other communication in whatever form (including internet and social media), which is addressed to the public at large or any section of the public.

(ii) ‘Publication’ includes any further publication (as defined in subparagraph (i) above) from the date of this Order, even if such information is derived from a previous stage or stages of these proceedings.

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

ANONYMITY

  1. Pursuant to s.6 Human Rights Act 1998, and/or CPR 39.2 and/or the Court’s inherent jurisdiction it is ordered that:
    a. the Claimant’s name is to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in open court;
    b. there be substituted for all purposes in these proceedings in place of references to the Claimant by name, and whether orally or in writing, the cipher “FTP”;
    c. if and insofar as the Claim Form (or any document) has been filed with the Court naming or identifying the Claimant, those documents are to be replaced and refiled replacing the Claimant’s name with the cipher FTP and removing any identifying details.
    d. the Claimant’s address is to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in open court;
    e. the Claimant has permission to use (where necessary) the address of the Claimant’s solicitors instead which is: Russells, Yalding House, 1st and 2nd Floors, 152-156 Great Portland Street, London W1W 5QA
  2. The Claimant’s name on CE-file will be anonymised in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Order.
  3. Pursuant to s.6 Human Rights Act 1998, and/or CPR 39.2 and/or the Court’s inherent jurisdiction and in furtherance of paragraph 1 of this Order and the Judge being satisfied that it is strictly necessary:
    a. the names of the Claimant’s witnesses of fact are to be withheld from the public and must not be disclosed in any proceedings in open court;
    b. there be substituted for all purposes in these proceedings in place of references to those witnesses by name, and whether orally or in writing, appropriate ciphers.

REPORTING RESTRICTION

  1. Pursuant to s.11 Contempt of Court Act 1981, there shall be no publication of the identity of the Claimant or of any matter likely to lead directly or indirectly to the identification of the Claimant in any report of, or otherwise in connection with, these proceedings, provided that nothing in this Order shall prevent the publication, disclosure or communication of any information which is contained in this Order.

RESTRICTIONS ON ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS ON THE COURT FILE

  1. Upon the Court being satisfied that it is strictly necessary:
    a. Without further order of the Court, a non-party may not obtain access to or copies of any of the documents set out below from the Court file: the Claim Form on which the Claimant is named and any documents that contain the Claimant’s name or would be likely to lead to the identification of the Claimant; any Confidential Exhibits to the Witness Statements or Confidential Schedules to applications, orders or witness statements (the “Restricted Documents”); and
    b. Any non-party wishing to obtain access to, or copies of, the Restricted Documents, must make an application to the Court, such application to be made by application notice served on the parties at least 14 days before the application is made.

PUBLIC DOMAIN

  1. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this Order shall prevent the publication of:
    a. Any information contained in any public judgment of the Court in these proceedings;
    b. Any information contained in any documents on the Court file which are open to public inspection without an order of the Court and which do not name or identify the Claimant.

APPLICATIONS TO VARY/DISCHARGE

  1. Any application by a party to vary or discharge this Order must be made by Application Notice, served on the other parties at least 3 days before the application is made save that the parties have liberty to apply to vary that period of notice.
  2. Any application by a non-party to vary or discharge this Order must be made by Application Notice, served on the parties at least 7 days before the application is made.

PUBLICATION OF THIS ORDER

  1. Pursuant to CPR 39.2(5) a copy of this Order will be published on the Judiciary Website
  2. The Court file shall be clearly marked with the words “An anonymity order was made in this case on Saturday 8 August 2026 and any application by a non-party to inspect or obtain a copy document from this file must be dealt with in accordance with the terms of that Order.”

COSTS

  1. The costs of and occasioned by the Application shall be reserved.

OBSERVATIONS


I consider that it is appropriate to limit the periods of notice required to be given of any application to vary or discharge this Order, whether by a party to this application or by any non-party. I do not consider it to be necessary to set a return date.

The Court will wish to consider whether it is appropriate for directions to be given for the speedy trial of this claim for a final injunction.

Timothy Mould

10 August 2026