07/04/2016 19:08 BST | Updated 14/04/2016 11:22 BST

PJS, YMA Identity Speculation Comes After A Line Of Celebrities Used Injunctions To Gag Press

Clarkson: 'Injunctions don't work... it's pointless.'

News that a married celebrity dad who allegedly cheated on his spouse in a threesome gained an injunction against the British press to hide his identity has sparked outrage from tabloid editors.

The identity of the international star and his partner - who is referred to as 'PJS' and 'YMA' in court documents - was published on the front page of a prominent US magazine this week.

But British editors' inability to do the same has seen them brand injunctions "pointless" and "draconian".

Both the Daily Mail and Sun on Sunday published pieces calling the law that allows stars to ban newspapers from reporting details of their extramarital affairs "an ass" and a "disgrace" respectively.

Many other high-profile personalities have fallen victim to being defeated by drawing attention to their own injunctions.

Here are five of the most famous:

  • 1. Jeremy Clarkson
    1. Jeremy Clarkson
    Dominic Lipinski/PA Wire
    Back in 2011, Jeremy Clarkson confessed to using a super-injunction to prevent his ex-wife from responding to allegations they had sex while he was still married. 

    He was initially referred to in reports as "a married TV star" when the injunction was enforced, but Clarkson later revealed himself to be the presenter in question. 

    He later said: "Injunctions don't work... it's pointless."

    The 'Top Gear' star told the Daily Mail: “One, most importantly, injunctions don’t work.

    "You take out an injunction against somebody or some organisation and immediately news of that injunction and the people involved and the story behind the injunction is in a legal-free world on Twitter and the internet. It’s pointless."
  • 2. John Terry
    2. John Terry
    Adam Davy/PA Archive
    Chelsea captain John Terry took out a gagging order preventing newspapers from reporting his affair with the ex-girlfriend of England team-mate Wayne Bridge. 

    The injunction was heavily criticised and just a few days later was lifted by a judge, who decided that freedom of speech should take precedence over privacy. 
  • 3. Ryan Giggs
    3. Ryan Giggs
    Richard Sellers/EMPICS Sport
    The ex-Manchester United midfielder Ryan Giggs took legal action to secure a super-injunction to stop the press reporting his affair with ex-Big Brother contestant Imogen Thomas. 

    But later that year Twitter users began naming him, a Scottish paper published a poorly anonymised photo of him in connection with the story and Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming used parliamentary privilege to name the man himself.

    The footballer gave up all rights to anonymity less than ten months later, in February 2012. 
  • 4. Andrew Marr
    4. Andrew Marr
    Steve Parsons/PA Archive
    Political stalwart Andrew Marr revealed in 2011 that he had taken out a super-injunction to suppress reports of an affair with a fellow journalist. 

    The BBC presenter had been criticised by 'Private Eye' editor Ian Hislop, who said that Marr, as a journalist himself, had been a "touch hypocritical". 

    Hislop said at the time: "As a leading BBC interviewer who is asking politicians about failures in judgment, failures in their private lives, inconsistencies, it was pretty rank of him to have an injunction while working as an active journalist."

    Marr said he was "embarrassed" about the gagging order and told the BBC: "I did not come into journalism to go around gagging journalists."
  • 5. Rio Ferdinand
    5. Rio Ferdinand
    John Walton/PA Wire
    Rio Ferdinand, the BT Sport Pundit, lost a High Court privacy action over a story in the Sunday Mirror about an alleged affair. 

    The married former Manchester United centre-back was seeking substantial damages for "misuse of private information".

    In court, the judge, Mr Justice Nicol, smacked down the claim, saying: "Overall, in my judgement, the balancing exercise favours the defendant's right of freedom of expression over the claimant's right of privacy."

    He continued: "At one level it was a 'kiss and tell' story. Even less attractively, it was a 'kiss and paid for telling' story, but stories may be in the public interest even if the reasons behind the informant providing the information are less than noble."