Paul Michell represents LSE in the EAT to protect the privacy of non-party in proceedings
Written by Cloisters
Paul Michell
Paul Michell successfully acted for LSE in Piepenbrock v London School of Economics and Political Sciences where the EAT made an order to protect the identity of an LSE employee.
Dr Piepenbrock made claims against a former colleague (D), who was not a party or witness in the proceedings, which were found to be untrue. The tribunal dismissed all his claims. It held that he was not a reliable or credible witness, that his approach to individuals who he believed had wronged him was “frequently malicious and actively destructive”, and that his “vilification” of D on a public website he controlled showed “his willingness to destroy her reputation”.
The EAT in making its order held that D was protected by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, even though she lived in the USA rather than in Europe; also, that her Article 8 rights in this case outweighed the principle of open justice or freedom of expression under Articles 6 or 10. The EAT found that in any event, an anonymity order was “in the interests of justice” given the claimant’s “very strong animus” against D, which it considered would lead him to misuse any judgment and related paperwork to ‘name and shame’ D.
Further reading:
The case is reported by the Employment Lawyers Association.
Piepenbrock v London School of Economics and Political Science [2022] EAT 119 (12 August 2022)