A well-known celebrity accused of sexual misconduct can now be named after he failed to lodge an appeal by the 4.30pm deadline on Monday, 9 November. The man had asked the High Court to permanently block the Guardian and ITN from publishing his identity and the allegations against him, but his bid was dismissed last week.

The unnamed British man, referred to in court as PPT, had until 4.30pm on Monday to file his appeal in London's High Court. According to the Evening Standard, as reported by Page Six, no appeal was filed, which means the two news organisations can now publish his name. He will remain anonymous until the Guardian and ITN actually publish it.

What the court decided last week

Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed the man's claim for a permanent injunction on Tuesday, 3 November, ruling that the public interest in the reporting outweighed the case for a ban. The judge said the reporting was of public interest and that an injunction would interfere with freedom of expression.

The judge was careful to stress what the ruling did and did not decide. As he put it in his written judgment, the court did not determine whether the allegations, or any of them, were true, and dismissing the claim does not amount to approval of any publication the defendants may decide to make. The allegations remain unproven, and the man denies them.

A temporary injunction keeping the man anonymous was left in place to give him time to appeal. The judge also made clear that it would not be up to the court to name the man, saying it remains the choice of the defendants what, when and how they publish, once any legal impediment to publication is removed.

The allegations and the investigation

The Guardian and ITN have been working together on an investigation since 2022. Their lawyers told the court they want to report on the man's alleged abuse of his power and position as a celebrity to contact and forge relationships with young women and teenagers to try to have sex with them. The outlets say they have interviewed more than 100 people and gathered some 30 sources, who have shown them emails, messages and documents relating to the allegations.

The outlets first approached the man in May 2022. In May this year they sent him letters setting out nearly 300 points about the alleged misconduct. He has denied the allegations throughout.

The suicide-risk argument

The man's legal team argued that publication would be highly likely to lead him to take his own life, and that he should be protected under the European Convention on Human Rights. His barrister, Sara Mansoori KC, told the court her client was highly vulnerable, had attempted suicide twice, had spent months in hospital and was detained under the Mental Health Act.

Mr Justice Nicklin accepted that the man was in a highly vulnerable position and that publication would increase his suicide risk, but found the evidence did not show that suicide would be inevitable. He also noted that state mental health services, not the courts, are responsible for the man's safety.

Lawyers for ITN and the Guardian argued that the women who spoke to them had been traumatised by the claimant's alleged conduct and had suffered mental health crises as a result, and that the news organisations had a duty to publish information they believe is in the public interest.

What happens next

With the appeal deadline now passed, the Guardian and ITN are free to publish the man's name and the allegations whenever they choose. Until they do, the reporting restrictions remain in place and the man cannot lawfully be identified. Anyone affected by the issues in this story can contact Samaritans on 116 123, free, at any time.