What can we say here?
Regular readers will know that certain information pertaining to a certain mortgage bank (previously known here as a former bank, Wreck, Crocket, etc), appeared here on FT Alphaville yesterday.
It is not here anymore because of a ruling made in the High Court at around 6.50pm on Tuesday. We are currently covered by a limited, temporary injunction covering the contents of a sale memorandum sent out to about 50 potential acquirers of Northern Rock. It runs until next Tuesday, where upon full evidence in the case will be heard.
In publishing information from the sale memorandum, we took the view here at FT Alphaville that the shareholders of Northern Rock and the market generally were entitled to know the assessment of the financial position of the bank - an institution that has had to borrow something north of £20bn from the Bank of England.
In response, Northern Rock sought an injunction which would prevent the whole of the media from reporting anything about the sale memorandum.
The FT’s crack legal squad vigorously resisted this and, as a result, the scope of the injunction sought was considerably narrowed. For example, Northern Rock wanted the injunction to prevent publication of the names of those who had been provided with the sale memorandum, notwithstanding the fact that names of potential bidders have already been widely published.
Northern Rock also sought an order that would have prevented disclosure of the fact that it had obtained an injunction. The FT resisted this and the order was refused.
Northern Rock intended that an injunction should be obtained anonymously, but this was also unsuccessful.
In view of the fact that the hearing went on so late, the judge granted a temporary injunction lasting seven days in order to preserve the position until he could hear full evidence. The FT argued that there was a substantial public interest in the story and that it was extremely important that shareholders were entitled to know where they stand. The Judge took the view that at an emergency hearing he would give priority to the fact that the sale memorandum contained a written confidentiality undertaking entered into by the original recipients of the document, and that he would protect this pending a full hearing of all the evidence.
(Apologies for the legalese. Normal service will be resumed as soon as possible.)
