51.   The defendant is not bound to reimburse the Department of Social Security until he is notified that the money in court has been paid out to the plaintiff.

52.   Difficulties can arise when there is more than one defendant.

53.   If the plaintiff can prove immediately and convincingly that the defendant is intending to publish palpable untruths, an injunction could be granted.

54.   Nor does the fact of an acquittal debar the media from alleging that the defendant was really guilty after all.

55.   The defendants were presumably outside the class of people who were likely to have access to the information publicly.

56.   The court held that the defendants were guilty of a breach of confidence.

57.   If the defendant was the only person other than the plaintiff using the information then the injunction would be effective to protect the plaintiff and would be granted.

58.   In this case, the plaintiffs were a finance house and the defendants were a company in liquidation and liquidators of that company.

59.   The defendants were art dealers who carried on business from a London gallery owned and controlled by the principal of the defendants, Mr Christopher Hull.

60.   However, the defendant may be able to escape liability if he can prove that he took all due diligence to avoid the commission of an offence.