Celebrity accused of 'inappropriate sexual activities' fails to lodge appeal over failed injunction and could be named

A celebrity who lost his bid for an injunction to prevent the publication of allegations including sexual misconduct against him has missed a deadline to take his case to the Court of Appeal.The famous man brought legal action against Independent Television News (ITN), which produces news programmes for ITV, Channel 4, Good Morning Britain and Channel 5, and Guardian News and Media (GNM), publisher of The Guardian.In a ruling on November 3, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed the bid for an injunction, ruling it would be an “exceptionally serious interference” with freedom of expression, but said the figure could take his case to the Court of Appeal.The judge said that any notice of appeal or requests for further time would need to be provided to the Court of Appeal by 4.30pm on Monday.Court staff confirmed on Monday after this deadline that neither document had been received.The well-known man cannot be named until ITN or GNM name him in connection with the allegations.Lawyers for the media organisations previously told the High Court in London the claims they want to report involve the man’s alleged “abuse of power and status” to contact young women and try to engage in “inappropriate and exploitative sexual activities”.The well-known man, who denies the allegations, sought an injunction to prevent this broadcast and publication because of a risk that he would take his own life, after two previous suicide attempts.Mr Justice Nicklin said that the man has repeatedly said he intends to take his own life if the allegations are published, and that this must be taken seriously.However, he added that these statements do not “establish that suicide is inevitable”.In the 52-page judgment, Mr Justice Nicklin also said that granting the injunction would not treat the man’s psychiatric condition or eliminate his elevated risk.The judge continued: “The evidence does not identify a point at which publication would become safe merely through the passage of time.“The relief sought would therefore be of uncertain and potentially indefinite duration.”He continued that hospitals and health staff caring for the individual, who is detained under the Mental Health Act, meant that the state had “assumed responsibility” for the man’s immediate safety and “can provide significant protection”, which “materially reduces the likelihood of suicide”.Read MoreSamaritans can be contacted for free, day or night, 365 days a year, on 116 123, or visit samaritans.org to find your nearest branch.