Twitter users 'reveal celeb injunction details'

Twitter users have attempted to unmask celebrities who have allegedly obtained super-injunctions to prevent the press from reporting details about their private lives.

Various Twitter accounts claimed to "out" a number of high-profile figures who resorted to court orders to protect their privacy.

Users on the micro-blogging site hoped to rebel against the gagging orders, but the names of certain celebrities were later removed from one Twitter account.

Tweeting on the subject, Jemima Khan dismissed the speculation circulating on Twitter about her private life. She wrote: "Rumour that I have a super-injunction preventing publication of 'intimate' photos of me and Jeremy Clarkson. NOT TRUE!"

Speaking to The Guardian, a spokesman for Twitter said: "There are tweets that we do remove, such as illegal tweets and spam. However, we make efforts to keep these exceptions narrow so they may serve to prove a broader and more important rule - we strive not to remove tweets on the basis of their content."

The tweets will add to growing pressure for action on super-injunctions, which have already been challenged by newspapers and some MPs on grounds that parliament and not the courts should decide the UK's privacy laws.

The situation was thrust into the limelight last month after BBC presenter Andrew Marr revealed that he took out a court injunction in 2008 to stop the press reporting details of his affair with a fellow journalist.

Just last week, it was disclosed that a Premier League footballer had also been granted a gagging order after being accused of having an affair.

Prime minister David Cameron recently said that the increasing use of super-injunctions was making him feel uneasy, while a legal committee set up by the Master of the Rolls will report on the issue later this month.