'Hello!' wins £1m appeal over Douglas wedding
For free real time breaking news alerts sent straight to your inbox sign up to our breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
Judges in the long-running legal battle over the unauthorised use of bootleg photos of the wedding of Michael Douglas to Catherine Zeta-Jones have overturned the £1m that Hello! magazine paid in compensation to its rival OK!.
Judges in the long-running legal battle over the unauthorised use of bootleg photos of the wedding of Michael Douglas to Catherine Zeta-Jones have overturned the £1m that Hello! magazine paid in compensation to its rival OK!.
The Court of Appeal upheld the £14,750 damages against Hello! and in favour of the Douglases for breaching their privacy by using photographs which they knew were taken by a gatecrasher to the couple's New York wedding in 2000. Lord Phillips said that "as a means of invading privacy, a photograph is particularly intrusive".
But the court overturned the £1m award of damages in favour of OK! and £2m legal costs because the contract between the couple and the magazine did not confer any legal right to prevent others publishing unauthorised photographs.
Had Hello! intended to cause OK! loss of sales, it would have been liable to pay compensation but, on the evidence, it had only set out to boost its own sales, not to damage those of OK!, the court ruled.
Hello! admitted last December that the snatched pictures were published as a "spoiler" to lessen the impact of OK!'s exclusive £1m contract with the Douglases to cover the wedding ceremony in November 2000.
James Price QC, representing Hello!, told the panel of three judges headed by the Master of the Rolls, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, that "spoilers" were a well-known tactic in the publishing industry and his client had been a victim in the past.
Hello! was quick to claim victory in the epic battle with its glossy rival. Chris Hutchings, the magazine's solicitor, said the ruling meant that his magazine's liability to OK! was now nil. "This was a spat between two rival publishers and not between Hello! and the Douglases. The judgment is a resounding win for Hello!," he said. "As a result of our win, Richard Desmond [owner of Express Newspapers and the OK! owner Northern and Shell], will now have to write a cheque to Hello! for a very large amount of money indeed."
But a statement issued by Northern and Shell said the appeal court had "fully vindicated" the Douglases' action against Hello!. "This decision will impact all publishers with exclusive rights as it means rivals will be free to run spoilers with no redress in law," the statement said. "OK! will therefore be appealing this judgment to the House of Lords."
When the case came to court in 2003, Mr Justice Lindsay ruled thatHello! had acted "unconscionably" by publishing unauthorised photographs of the Douglas wedding. The judge said the snatched photographs, taken by Rupert Thorpe, son of the former Liberal leader Jeremy Thorpe, had been obtained by "misrepresentation or subterfuge" because of the lengths Mr Thorpe went to gatecrash the event. He said this "intrusion" was also a breach of the Press Complaints Commission code of conduct.
Yesterday Lord Phillips said: "It is quite wrong to suppose that a person who authorises publication of selected personal photographs taken on a private occasion, will not reasonably feel distress at the publication of unauthorised photographs taken on the same occasion."
The judge said the appeal court had recognised the Douglases' right of privacy or confidentiality. "These photographs invaded the area of privacy which the Douglases had chosen to retain. It was the Douglases, not OK!, who had the right to protect this area of privacy or confidentiality."
Wedding row
* NOVEMBER 2000: Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta- Jones sign a £1m deal with OK! to cover their wedding.
* 18 NOVEMBER: The couple marry in New York.
* 22 NOVEMBER: The couple and OK! win an injunction preventing paparazzi wedding photos appearing in Hello!.
* 23 NOVEMBER: The Court of Appeal overturns that and Hello! sells its wedding copies.
* 21 DECEMBER: The couple win legal permission to sue Hello! for invasion of privacy.
* 11 APRIL: Six-week High Court trial ends, with judge ruling their privacy was invaded and Hello! breached OK!'s commercial confidentiality.
* 7 NOVEMBER: The couple are awarded only £14,600 but Hello! is ordered to pay OK! £1m, with £4m costs and damages.
* DECEMBER 2004: Hello! appeals against damages.