Mr Justice Eady, the presiding judge not only in McKennitt v. Ash but in every other important privacy case since, has spoken out against the wide-spread criticism of his decisions, and of him personally (The Guardian’s report is here). In particular, it seems Eady felt strongly about Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre’s comments (on the judge’s “moral and social nihilism”) following the Max Mosley case.

Alongside the paper version of the Guardian’s piece (not online) is a short summary of McKennitt v. Ash:

In 2005, Mr Justice Eady granted an injunction to the Canadian folk singer Loreena McKennitt to prevent publication of parts of a book called ‘Travels with Loreena McKennitt: My Life as a Friend’. Eady ruled that the “private” information disclosed in the book, written by McKennitt’s former friends Niema Ash, included a description of McKennit’s home, its decor, layout and state of cleanliness. The case has become an important part of the law on privacy, widening the scope of what is considered private and raising the bar for people seeking to justify publishing private information.