"In this case the judge was clearly wrong to grant an injunction which did little more than protect a billionaire megalomaniac from embarrassment and everything to shut his victims up. "

Steve, you are clearly an intelligent man so I find it difficult to understand why you don't seem to be able to grasp the issue. An application was made to the court asking them to prevent publication of these claims. The injunction was a temporary measure to maintain the status quo until the court could hear the arguments and decide whether publication should be allowed or not. It would clearly have been a nonsense if the newspaper could jump the gun and publish anyway, before the court had a chance to consider the case. It is a usual and expected part of the legal process in situations where the court is being asked to decide on whether something should or should not be allowed, and I think I am correct in saying that the other parties did not object.

Parliamentary privilege is indeed important, but so are other rights. The issue is not whether Hain could use parliamentary privilege but whether he should have done. There may well have been a public interest justification in revealing Green's name, but there is also a public interest argument for not having politicians interfere with the legal process.