This brief, mentioned in the Telegraph article, concerns a 41 year old "mildly learning disabled" man who has been legally barred from having sexual encounters and will be under supervision to ensure that he does not break the judicial order. Why? Apparently he has an above-average sexual drive, doesn't know "enough" to make informed consent and there's a belief that he will somehow be damaged and disturbed if given basic sexual health education. Let's see if I understood: he wants it, he's doing it, but they don't think he has the capacity to understand what he's doing, so someone's going to be paid to be his Anti-Sex Chaperone?
More info on the court here and here as well as the wiki page.
Anyone else find this frighteningly Orwellian???