US-based Twitter should be safe from Giggs' lawyers

Twitter is unlikely to be forced to hand over user data in light of the super injunction furore, despite the Attorney General reportedly hinting that users could be punished.

Attorney General Dominic Grieve said in an emergency debate in the Commons that because the UK lacks privacy legislation, judges are left to interpret the law and punish those who break it, according to the Daily Mail.

Ha said that many Twitter users could face prosecution for breaking the super injunction imposed by footballer Ryan Giggs.

However Susan Hall, a partner at legal practice Cobbetts, cast doubt on Grieve's comments, arguing that Twitter is not obligated to disclose details to the UK courts because it is a US company.

Hall suggested Giggs could go to the US courts to request Twitter be made to hand over information on the users that broke his injunction.

However she said he is unlikely to have success with such a strategy, particularly because the US government has struggled to get Twitter to hand over details of the key players involved in the WikiLeaks saga.

"Giggs could make a similar appeal to the US courts as the central government did, but his appeal will be considered less seriously as the information at stake does not breach national security," suggested Hall.

She also suggested super injunctions are unworkable in the current social media environment.

"A person may find out the information and tweet about it without even knowing it is the subject of a super injunction," she said.

Alex Brown, a partner at international law firm Simmons & Simmons, argued that the Twitter-Giggs scandal had highlighted the need for social media sites to be included in any forthcoming privacy law.

"It raises the broader question of whether we need a more formalised law than we have at the moment. We have the Data Protection Act and the Humans Right Act, but the right to privacy is mainly being made by the courts," said Brown.

"We may need something more codified but then this will be close to giving the UK something like a constitutional bill of rights."