The number of public figures using privacy arguments has more than doubled over the past year as the controversy over the use of injunctions has grown, according to research from legal publisher Sweet & Maxwell.

The firm’s data shows a rise from nine to 24 in the number of high-profile figures using privacy arguments in court actions in the 12 months ending 31 May 2011.

Cases involving public figures accounted for almost half (48%) of all reported privacy cases in the past year, up from one in five cases (21%) last year, indicating that public figures are increasingly going to court to seek injunctions against newspapers to prevent the publication of details about their personal lives.

The statistics also show that the total number of reported privacy cases in the UK courts went up by 16%, from 43 to 50. Jonathan Cooper, editor of Sweet & Maxwell’s European Human Rights Law Review, said there is growing concern that UK courts are granting too many injunctions to high-profile individuals to the detriment of free speech. ‘The courts must strive to achieve an even balance between an individual’s right to privacy and a free press, or there is the risk of a chilling effect on the media.’

Cooper said privacy was a fundamental principal of the Human Rights Act, and should not be used as an argument to undermine free speech.