Revelations of the extent of their use came after a judge rejected David Walliams’ attempts to prevent the reporting of allegations about his predatory behaviour.
But scores of celebrities, athletes and public figures have successfully turned to the courts to keep allegations of infidelity and sexual misconduct out of the spotlight.
A total of 111 applications for new privacy injunctions have been made over the past decade, according to official figures. But as the data only covers this period, the true number granted will be far higher. Companies can also apply for injunctions to prevent reputational harm.
Among those said to be protected by a court order is another well-known male celebrity accused of having ‘multiple’ victims.
Justine Smith, who works for Private Eye magazine, said the unnamed star had been granted the order several months ago and was ‘in the public eye’.
The vast majority of injunction applications by celebrities are used to cover up affairs by making arguments based on privacy law. Walliams, who denies accusations of targeting girls as young as 15, said publishing the allegations would infringe his right to life as it raised the risk of him taking his own life.
Celebrities who still cannot be named in the Press include PJS, a married star who allegedly had a threesome with a couple in a paddling pool full of olive oil.
Lower courts initially refused him a privacy injunction because his cheating contradicted his public portrayal of married commitment, only for the Supreme Court to later rule in his favour.
David Walliams was unmasked this week as the 'well-known man' who had sought a gagging order to prevent the reporting of allegations against him
Other stars who have secured injunctions include a footballer who hushed up claims he cheated on his partner with another celebrity and a married actor who cheated on his wife with Helen Wood – a prostitute who also slept with Wayne Rooney.
A high-profile female celebrity described as a 'figure of trust' was granted an injunction in Manchester in 2015 to stop her lover leaking details of her affair with a famous married man to the Press.
Others who have managed to keep their dirty laundry secret include a football manager who had an alleged secret lover, a 'world-famous' sportsman accused of having an affair and a well-known married man working in the entertainment industry.
In a separate case, a 'high-profile figure' obtained an injunction to stop a woman revealing details of sexual encounters that took place in his home because it would be 'very distressing for his family' to hear of them.
Marcus Johnstone, a specialist sexual offences lawyer at PCD Solicitors, said: ‘Courts may grant an interim injunction, a temporary order that can be quite wide and puts a block on everything before the court can report on the proceedings.
‘The court then investigates exactly what’s gone on. If a final injunction is given then it will be more specific about what it covers and who’s covered by the injunction.’
From 2016 to 2026, there have been a total of 111 applications for new interim privacy injunctions, Ministry of Justice figures reveal. There have been 16 hearings concerning final injunctions and 43 concerning the continuation or variation of an existing order.
Ryan Giggs famously obtained a gagging order to suppress reporting of an alleged affair. But it was secured in England and did not apply to Scotland - allowing Scottish newspapers to name him
Another injunction was obtained by a married actor who cheated on his wife with escort Helen Wood
Mr Johnstone said an injunction usually only binds the specific people or organisations listed in the court order. It can sometimes cover other 'unknown parties', but these people are required to know of its existence.
Injunctions do not prevent victims from going to the police, although by suppressing media coverage of alleged offending they reduce the chances of others coming forward.
'Even a superinjunction - where you can't even report on the existence of the injunction itself - can't remove the rights of the police to investigate,' Mr Johnstone said.
'It can't override the criminal law or an individual's rights to go to the police and report the crime.'
The lawyer predicted injunctions would become less popular among celebrities as they are increasingly shown to be ineffective in the modern age. 'Walliams was the worst-kept secret going - it was on social media and everyone outside England and Wales was reporting about it [including in Scotland]. So it makes a mockery of the whole idea of the injunction.'
A number of celebrities have secured privacy injunctions, only for their identities to eventually emerge.
The most famous case involved Ryan Giggs, who secured a gagging order in April 2011 to suppress reports about his alleged affair with model Imogen Thomas.
However, his attempt to silence her fell apart after a sustained Twitter campaign that resulted in Lib Dem MP John Hemming naming him in Parliament.
By then Giggs had already been named in Scotland, where injunctions obtained in England and Wales do not automatically apply. One newspaper, the Sunday Herald, carried a photo of him on its front page.
It later emerged that Giggs had also had an affair with his brother's wife.
Jeremy Clarkson was granted a secrecy order in 2010 to prevent his ex-wife, Alex Hall, from claiming they had an affair after he remarried.
After being named on social media, he decided to lift the order himself, declaring: 'Injunctions don't work – it's pointless.'
Andrew Marr was the first public figure to voluntarily admit trying to conceal his infidelity through the courts.
Chelsea star John Terry also secured an injunction in 2010 to prevent newspapers reporting on an alleged extra-marital affair with Vanessa Perroncel, the ex-girlfriend of his former Chelsea and England teammate Wayne Bridge. Ms Perroncel is pictured with Bridge
Ryan Giggs, who secured a gagging order in April 2011 to suppress reports about his alleged extramarital affair with model Imogen Thomas. He's seen with his ex wife, Stacey Cooke in 2010
At the time, he believed he had fathered a child with the woman. He also made maintenance payments until he discovered through a DNA test that he was not the girl's father.
Former Chelsea star John Terry also secured an injunction in 2010 to prevent newspapers reporting on an alleged extra-marital affair with Vanessa Perroncel, the ex-girlfriend of his former Chelsea and England teammate Wayne Bridge
I'm Katie Hind, and I experienced the Noughties first-hand - when Russell Brand, David Walliams and their celebrity cronies were at their sleaziest.
At the time, I was a showbusiness gossip columnist for a tabloid newspaper, which often meant staying out until the early hours, like Brand and his friends, though my mission was not to find a sexual conquest but a scoop.
I noticed wherever Brand was, a woman would not be far away - whether she liked it or not.
But this was thrown out by a judge, who said he believed Terry was more concerned about the threat to his lucrative sponsorship deals than his family's privacy.
The allegations against Walliams, coupled with the recent jailing of comedian Russell Brand, have reignited debate about accountability, secrecy and the use of legal mechanisms to shield high-profile figures from scrutiny.
This includes calls to review the use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), which are widely used in the entertainment industry to prevent figures from disclosing supposedly private information.
Lou Teasdale, a make-up artist and former girlfriend of Walliams, said it is ‘open and standard protocol for girls to sign NDAs and have their phones taken from them before they’re left alone with a famous man’.
In an Instagram post shared yesterday, the stylist said: ‘I’m talking about a culture... that treats a celebrity man’s privacy as more important than a woman’s safety.
‘How can a man be expected to behave with any accountability when there is an agreement in place beforehand to remove the woman’s voice and the device that would keep her safe?’
Giving evidence to the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee yesterday, media minister Ian Murray said he was ‘deeply saddened and also angry’ to see the prevalence of abuse by men in the media industry.
NDAs, he added, are ‘a major part of the problem'.