Published in full: super-injunction document at the heart of the attempt to gag Parliament Mr Burby alleges that the unnamed ex-spouse, whom he describes as one of the wealthiest women in the world, had a sexual relationship "with one of her two solicitors," as well as two other men, one of which resulted in her having an abortion. Archerfield Partners, a firm of solicitors acting for the ex-wife, has made a series of threats against the joint committee over its decision to publish the submission on its website. In a letter to every member of the 26-strong committee, as well as to the Attorney General Dominic Grieve, a High Court judge and John Bercow, the Speaker of the House of Commons, the firm asked the MPs and peers on the committee to remove the submission "as a matter of extreme urgency" and warned that its continued publication would have diplomatic consequences. The letter, which was leaked to The Daily Telegraph, said: "We have no doubt that should the committee continue to publish then the injunction will be fully breached and further harm done to our client. However the committee has decided at a private meeting to continue publishing the submission, in the face of the threats. The attempt to bully the committee threatens to undermine the supremacy of Parliament. It follows widespread criticism of British courts for injuncting the publication of information. Archerfield also threatened The Daily Telegraph with an injunction ahead of its reporting of Mr Burby's submission on Friday night. No application was made, however, and the report was published in the following day's newspaper. John Whittingdale MP, the committee's chairman, said last week that Mr Burby's evidence was an "interesting and relevant submission," given that his committee had been told by judges that super-injunctions were now "time-limited." The last known attempt to gag the reporting of Parliament was in 2009, when lawyers for Trafigura, an oil firm, attempted to prevent newspapers publishing a parliamentary question. Trafigura obtained a gagging order preventing any details of the question posed by Paul Farrelly MP being made public. It was abandoned after thousands of users of the Twitter website identified the parties involved. The committee is made up of both MPs and peers and is considering the system of privacy and injunctions. They were told earlier this year by Kenneth Clarke, the Lord Chancellor, that super-injunctions "are now being granted only for very short periods" and "you cannot have just long-running secret litigation."