Celebrity STILL not named despite losing bid to stop exposure of sex abuse claims against him

He had argued that he is “very likely” to take his own life if the claims laid against him are made public, in what has been described as an “unprecedented” claim.

Mr Justice Nicklin delivered the decision to the celebrity this afternoon.

During a two-day trial in late October, the High Court was told by lawyers for the media organisations that the allegations they want to report involve the man’s alleged “abuse of power and status” to contact young women.

They also involve allegations of attempts to engage in “inappropriate and exploitative sexual activities”.

Delivering his judgment on Tuesday, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed the injunction bid and said in a summary of his ruling: “The claimant’s claim for an injunction was dismissed.

“The court did not determine whether the allegations, or any of them, were true, and the dismissal of the claim does not amount to approval of any publication the defendants may decide to make.”

He added that the man will remain anonymous to allow any appeal bids to be lodged, and can take any appeal to the Court of Appeal.

Sara Mansoori, KC for the unnamed celebrity, asked the court for time to decide whether they would seek the green light to challenge the ruling.

She said that her client is “in a highly vulnerable position” and has “not been in a position to give us instructions on any appeal”.

She continued that it is “not clear” when these instructions could come, but that she hoped to be able to confirm the position of the man by Thursday.

Mr Justice Nicklin said: “The court has moved exceptionally quickly to accommodate this trial and to produce a judgment.

“It is slightly concerning that there is not an ability to proceed today.”

Sara Mansoori KC previously said the celebrity denies the allegations of wrongdoing against him and that publication “would have a potentially fatal impact”.

She told the court: “The only reason they would not be fatal is because the claimant would be locked up and prevented from his desire to end his life.”

The barrister also said the claimant “has no intention of returning to public life”.

Gavin Millar KC, for ITN and GNM, previously told the court that the case risks “dragging judges into assessing the causes of suicidal ideation, which are for professionals and not for a judge”.

He added: “The obligation falls on the hospital to keep him safe, and that’s that. Plainly, the proposed publication would make a valuable contribution to a debate of public importance, about men using their power to be able to misconduct themselves against women in that area of society.”

Samaritans can be contacted for free, day or night, 365 days a year, on 116 123, or visit samaritans.org to find your nearest branch.