Public inquiry – Restriction order – Confidential information. Court of Session: Refusing a reclaiming motion and a cross-appeal in proceedings which concerned the petitioner's request for a restriction order preventing publication of allegedly confidential information in documents it had produced to a public inquiry, the court held that in refusing the petitioner's motion for interim suspension of the respondent's decision to refuse its request and interim interdict from publishing the information the Lord Ordinary had not erred: his decision was not contrary to the statutory duty of fairness, or a violation of the petitioner's rights under art 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights, nor was it was irrational; furthermore, on the respondent's cross-appeal, the Lord Ordinary had not erred in holding that the balance of convenience would have favoured the grant of interim orders.