In the last few weeks, I've seen more super injunctions than I have easter eggs. In fact, the courts seem to be dishing them out in such a manner you wonder if they have indeed confused these binding laws for egg-shaped confectionary.

But with today's news that a user on Twitter has revealed most of the names that have been quietly associated with recent injunctions, it seems a few journalists have taken the 'sod it' approach to reporting on these stories.

Example number one being this Daily Mail article that seems to serve no other purpose than reveal the identities of two celebrities who had hoped to hush the press reporting on their private misdemeanors. The final paragraph in particular seems to laugh in the face of these court orders.

Has the Mail sent their lawyers on holiday? 


Daily Mail following the path laid by Twitter?