No there shouldn't be a legal injunction, and here's why:
I don't believe Caroline Flack had certain paparazzi agencies on speed dial, and was trying to bring media attention on herself.
I believe she was a surface extrovert with a job which required her to be "out there", but actually she was in a lot of torment. And when she was in said torment, the press would relentlessly run negative articles because Madonna/whore complex, weird fascination with single sexually confident woman living her life, etc.
Katie Price on the other hand - she actually MAKES money from the negative coverage and at times I firmly believe she encourages it in order to get some kind of pity or hate "narrative" going about some part of her life. Otherwise, why have columns about her, or coverage, or TV or anything?
She profits and exists as a media personality due to stories about her life, and these are stories she has actively encouraged - she plays the villain to get more work, more coverage, more money.
Don't get me wrong, it's a deal with the Devil so to speak as the press won't do her any favours just because she courts it, and I worry hugely for her mental health and identity as a result.
But they are two different things and should not be conflated. May Caroline Flack RIP.