The Twitter injunction, the first of its kind, was allowed by the judge because it was the only means of communication with the defendant.

The unknown user had been posting threads posing as Blaney’s Blarney, the name of Blaney’s own blog, which had been followed by friends and colleagues of Blaney believing it was him.

The settlement reached is covered by confidentiality but the blogger has agreed to pay damages to Help for Heroes, the charity set up in 2007 to help British soldiers injured in wars since 9/11.

He has also disclosed his identity. Although this is also covered by confidentiality, Blaney told Solicitors Journal he was not surprised to find out who it was.

Blaney’s case was that the unauthorised use of his name breached his copyright and intellectual property rights.

The injunction, Blaney said, was “an important step in dealing with online bullying”.

“Today is a great day for the overwhelming majority of well-meaning, decent people who use the internet and a bad day for bullies,” Blaney said on his blog. “It is the day the scales of justice were tipped back in favour of innocent victims. I am proud that my firm has set precedent and made law today.”

In December last year, an Australian court allowed the service of an injunction via Facebook after the defendants had refused all other means of service.

Matthew Richardson, the barrister who secured the order in Blaney’s case, said it was “a huge step forward in preventing anonymous abuse of the internet”.

He added: “People have to learn that they can no longer hide behind the cloak of anonymity the internet provides and break the law with impunity.”

Solicitors Journal columnist Richard Barr said judges have always tried to help claimants in the face of defendants repeatedly refusing to be served by more traditional means.

He said on one occasion he served an injunction by rolling it into a ball and throwing it at the defendant, and that the court deemed it properly served.