A sportsman who obtained an injunction preventing journalists publishing details of his private life has won an appeal against a ruling which would have revealed his identity. Details of this latest evolution in the case law on privacy are available here courtesy of the BBC. Does this ruling, which means that the public may know the bare facts of the case but not the identities of those involved, achieve a sensible balance between the right to privacy and freedom of expression? Is the Human Rights Act compatible with the survival of popular tabloid newspapers? Are such newspapers necessary to the health of democracy? Will the concealed identities now be revealed on social networking sites instead? Any answers?