In Mionis v Democratic Press SA  EWCA Civ 1194, the Court of Appeal for England and Wales upheld the enforceability of a Tomlin Order that enjoined media from publishing allegedly defamatory comments.
Mr Minois was embroiled in reports of tax evasion and sought to sue the responsible newspaper for libel. Settlement was reached on the basis that the newspaper would withdraw the offending articles and not publish anything further. More articles were published shortly after settlement. The High Court of England and Wales refused to grant Mr Minois an injunction against the newspaper. The Court of Appeal overturned that decision.
The case in the Court of Appeal focused on balancing the right to freedom of expression against the public interest in holding parties to agreements into which they freely enter. While the right to freedom of expression was undoubtedly important, when an agreement was entered into in settlement of litigation, with legal advice received, it would require a strong case for a court to conclude such a bargain was disproportionate, and unenforceable. Generally, there were benefits to parties, the administration of justice, and the public interest in allowing proceedings to settle. Here, there were obvious advantages for both parties in settling, and the parties had each taken expert legal advice before settling. In those circumstances, the Court found there was nothing disproportionate about holding the parties to their agreement.
See the Court's decision here.