Sir Philip Green: Non-disclosure agreements explained

FT Politics
|

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

This week's main good news was dominated by nondisclosure agreements on Wednesday, the Daily Telegraph splash, a permanent businessman had spent half a million pounds on an injunction to stop the paper putting allegations of sexual harassment and bullying the rooms of who this was exploded on Thursday when Peter Hain use parliamentary privilege in house of lows to feel that it was syphilis. Green the retail top. Shop Mogo d do the right thing and do nondisclosure agreements. Need for forming Saran degree let's begin with specifics of this case the Daily Telegraph being conducted an eight month investigation into cer-, Philip green. It's spoken to lots of people would put forward allegations about his behavior. Green denies all these allegations, we should state, and they wanting to publish this nece, some points activators legal team spent five hundred thousand pounds on high powered lawyers and gotten in junction, the junction was not about the Dita's the story, but it was about the nondisclosure agreements signed between the people putting allegations and the retail mogul himself. So what happened next? So having had an extraordinary from page of the telegraph this week with the blackout shape saying we've been prevented from naming the senior business man who's been accused of these inappropriate workplace behaviors you then had what became a bit of a sort of game of parliamentary. There as to who was going to use parliamentary privilege, which is where MP's amperes or allowed without redress to say things in parliament without being sued, for example, and that will room even Wednesday around PM queues at an MP was going to name the individual concern that didn't happen. But then yesterday in a moment of kind of high drama in the house of lords Peter Hain, the former labor minister decided to name Philip green as individuals of the telegraph had been trying to go after and the individual who had spent all this money on what was popularly seen as gagging. Clause to gag the press and also to gag the complaints against him. It's way more complicated than that. However, two out of the five complainants actually supported the injunction, and there's been a major backlash since Peter Hain took this action against his decision to do. So because parliament privilege where you're actively say all legal system has got this wrong. And so is opponent Taryn decided to speak out about it and overrule the courts is very very very rarely used and should only be used an extremist, and there's been a serious amount of criticism even from other former home secretaries against Petain from his own side. And there is historical precedent for this which was doing the host Sufen junction era. John hemming who is a liberal Democrat MP used parliamentary privilege in the house of Commons to name Ryan Giggs football for having a super junction again about details of his private life. And when it happened, then when it happened with Lord in this week this respective speakers of those houses will very unhappy about because parliament privileged should only be used in those extreme circumstances. And it will be interesting to see whether this injunction is still how because they were now in this ought situation where everyone is reporting about the green, but the details of the allegations sto cannot republished because the injunction is those standing in the Telegraph's co. On so Philip to drop the injunction, but still no sign of that at the moment. That's also what's weird about Peter Hanes decision to use paunchy privileged to name Philip green. Which is that the actually the legal had not yet been exhausted. I think that's a really crucial point to remember. So yes, indeed. The telegraph is still sort of stuck in a slight publishing limbo about the details of the story. And meanwhile, whistled of all plunged into this quite interesting debate about the role of NDA's in commercial life. Whether they're actually being abused not to

Coming up next