Search in vain for the case in the court lists of the high court in London: it appears only as “RJW and SJW v The Guardian”.” Recent data The Ministry of Justice now releases biannual reports with a statistical summary of the number of anonymised privacy injunctions since August 2011.
Anonymised injunction / privacy hearings in 2010 / 2011 [More detail on the Inforrm blog] CA = Court of Appeal.
Our most recent data showed that 69% of postdocs would have salaries raised (at 87 institutions); 6% of postdocs may have seen salaries raised or have hours tracked (at 19 institutions); 3% of postdocs would be hourly (at 12 institutions); and for 22% of postdocs we simply did not yet know (from 220 institutions).
What will happen next as a result of this injunction?
First, a preliminary assessment must be made of the merits of the court case that has been filed against those alleged to have infringed IP rights, to ensure that there is a “serious question to be tried”.The new rule nearly doubles the weekly guaranty threshold to 4 per week (,500 per year).The highly compensated employee exemption minimum annual salary requirement was set to increase from 0,000 to 4,004 per year. A report released on 2o May 2011 by the Master of the Rolls’ committee investigating super injunctions further clarified definitions. As the media commentator Roy Greenslade has noted, the term “super injunction” is now being used by journalists to describe privacy injunctions where the name or names are anonymised but details of the case are publicly available.