Case No. ZC19D00073

.33.It is in my judgment also relevant to bear in mind that H’s behaviour has caused much more damage to him than it has to W. H’s failure to provide information led inevitably to my rejection of his claim about the loan notes. 34.I accept W’s contention that if H had provided the information that had been ordered she might have been able to argue for a different timeframe for payment but I regard it as theoretical. I cannot envisage that I would have made an order that was in any significant way different to that which I did make. 35.The balance between the interests that arise does not always require an all or nothing approach. A proportionate approach is appropriate, weighing the starting point of privacy as against the gravity of wrongdoing. In cases where the balance is not overwhelming, justice can be served by limiting the publication to the misbehaviour. A litigant may expose himself to publication of his wrongful acts without losing the protection of confidentiality of other matters.