On today's chart 88K views since yesterday

Neidle challenges scope of Russell Brand's gagging injunction

The tax lawyer tells Times Radio that the order stopped an accuser discussing her allegations with family, friends, new doctors or police.

Channel:

Times Radio Story of November 9, 2026Trari Newsroom

Why this story? One of the most watched videos since yesterday, with 87,957 views.

The ‘Astonishing’ Russell Brand Injunction That’s ‘Shocked Every Lawyer Who’s Seen It’ | Dan Neidle

Things we can learn from the video

Press to jump

0:51Neidle says the injunction restricted conversations about the allegations with family, friends, new doctors and police.
1:36He calls for government law officers to investigate how many comparable injunctions exist.
3:49Neidle argues that privacy restrictions can give wealthy individuals disproportionate power over accusers and journalists.
6:40Rifkind and York examine the joint newspaper investigation and the professional networks surrounding prominent entertainers.
10:24The discussion turns to proposed legislative protections and safety standards for creative-industry freelancers.

An injunction that reaches beyond publication and into conversations with a doctor is at the centre of Dan Neidle's Times Radio interview about Russell Brand.

Speaking to Kate McCann and Stig Abell, the tax lawyer describes the restrictions placed on massage therapist Sylvie Berkey after she made allegations against Brand. Neidle says the order prevented her from discussing those allegations with family, friends, new doctors or the police.

"An injunction like this is using the power of the state to stop someone talking," he says.

The discussion drew around 88,000 views within its first few hours today. It adds a different dimension to the channel's earlier interview about the evidence behind the Brand investigation: this time, the subject is the legal machinery that can prevent an account being heard.

Neidle's central distinction is between obtaining an injunction and establishing that an accusation is false. He says Brand obtained the order without proving the allegations false, and calls for government law officers to investigate how many comparable restrictions exist. His concern is not only the terms of this order, but the lack of transparency around others.

Times Radio separately reports today that Brand has been sentenced to prison following convictions for rape and sexual assault.

The video then broadens into a discussion of entertainment-industry accountability. With Hugo Rifkind, The Times journalist Melissa York examines the professional networks surrounding prominent performers and the media culture that helped package Brand as entertainment. The closing discussion considers proposed protections and safety standards for freelance workers in creative industries.

Published on Trari