Zeta Jones battle with 'Hello!' ends in hollow victory
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
Catherine Zeta Jones and Michael Douglas scraped a victory yesterday in their claim for damages against Hello! magazine over the publication of unauthorised pictures of their wedding.
The magazine faces a possible £3m bill for legal costs and damages to be determined at a later hearing after a High Court ruling which criticised the behaviour of the paparazzi involved. But the Hollywood couple may still be out of pocket because the judge found against them on a number of other issues.
Mr Justice Lindsay ruled that the Douglases' wedding was a private event and that Hello! had acted "unconscionably" by publishing snatched photographs of the couple without their permission.
The magazine's claim to freedom of expression, said the judge, was not a "trump card" and was in this case overridden by the manner in which the Hollywood couple's confidential agreement with OK! magazine had been breached by Hello!. He said a wedding was an exceptional event for any bride and groom and just because Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta Jones were public figures it did not mean they had a lesser right to complain about intrusion.
The judge said the snatched photographs, taken by Rupert Thorpe, son of the former Liberal leader Jeremy Thorpe, were obtained by "misrepresentation or subterfuge" because of the lengths Mr Thorpe went to gatecrash the event. He said this "intrusion" into the private lives of the Douglases was also a breach of the Press Complaints Commission code of conduct. But the judgment, which expressly rejected the couple's substantive claim for breach of privacy, left both sides claiming victory.
The Douglases issued a statement saying: "We deeply appreciate that the court has recognised the principle that every individual has the right to be protected from excessive and unwanted media intrusion into their private lives."
Sally Cartwright, publishing director of Hello!, said nine out of the 13 claims against them had been thrown out. "The areas where [the judge] has found against us are, frankly, commercial ones," she said.
The Marquesa De Varela, the celebrity fixer employed by Hello! who was also sued by the Douglases, was found not to be liable in damages. Her lawyer, Helen Mulcahy, said the Marquesa would be pursuing both OK! and the Douglases for her legal costs estimated to be £500,000.
In his judgment Mr Justice Lindsay said he had no doubt that the couple suffered real distress and that Ms Zeta Jones had cried when she learnt of the unauthorised photographs.
He added: "I have in mind too that the steps taken by the Douglases were not taken solely for reward or as hype but were taken in a genuine and reasonable belief that thereby an offensive media frenzy would be avoided."
During the six-week hearing at the High Court in London, Ms Zeta Jones, 33, said she felt "devastated, shocked and appalled" when she realised that paparazzi had gatecrashed her wedding at the Plaza Hotel in New York in November 2000.
She and Mr Douglas, 58, had signed the £1m deal with OK! after turning down a higher offer from Hello!. Ms Zeta Jones said she felt "violated" when Hello! published the unauthorised photographs, which she claimed were "sleazy and unflattering".
Although the couple are claiming £500,000 and OK! £1.75m, Mr Justice Lindsay ruled out exemplary or aggravated damages. A spokesperson for Hello! said the magazine appeal against the findings.
Judgment seen as missed opportunity to clarify law on celebrities' right to privacy
By Robert Verkaik
The judge who awarded victory to Catherine Zeta Jones and Michael Douglas did so without having to create a new law of privacy. Mr Justice Lindsay said it was not his intention to do the work of Parliament.
Instead, he relied on the ancient rule of confidentiality to give force to the couple's claim for damages for the snatched pictures of their private wedding ceremony two years ago.
But many lawyers expressed disappointment yesterday that the High Court had missed an opportunity to clarify or develop this area of the law. Celebrities and their lawyers will now turn to Naomi Campbell for help in forging a new free-standing right to privacy. Ms Campbell is to have her claim for breach of privacy against the Daily Mirror heard by the House of Lords, which will be asked to settle the issue on the basis of the newly implemented Human Rights Act. The media will be hoping the law lords follow the Court of Appeal's rulings, which support the argument that celebrities who court publicity have a lesser right to privacy.
Lawyers acting for celebrities will want the judges to take the opposite view and bolster their clients' ability to plead privacy.
Ministers have said they do not intend to legislate in this area. But if the House of Lords fails to grasp the nettle in the Campbell case the Government may be forced to act. Yesterday, Mr Justice Lindsay gave the clearest indication yet that if Parliament failed to meet the challenge, the judges would develop the law of privacy on their own.
But he claimed it would be "unsatisfactory" because it would be at the "expense of litigants" and cause delay and uncertainty.
He said it was at least arguable that a law of privacy would not, as many MPs and the media maintain, "stifle or oppress" the freedoms enjoyed by Western democracies.
But he added that "the subject is better left to Parliament, which can of course, consult interests far more widely".
In the meantime celebrities' lawyers will be able to use the Zeta Jones-Douglas case to encourage judges to be the first to change the law for the benefit of their own clients.
Star Wars
By Natasha Rawlingson Plant
1993 OK! launches, with an exclusive "story" on Michael Jackson's first baby, Prince Michael. It costs the magazine £1.8m for the interview and pictures, which Jackson, above, hoped would stop fake pictures being sold and circulated to the media.
1999 Hello and OK! compete for exclusive rights to the "wedding of the millennium" between Victoria Adams, right, and David Beckham. OK! eventually wins after Hello declines a joint package to cover Mel B and Jimmy Gulzar's wedding as well for a total of £1.5m.
2002 Liz Hurley, below, creates a bidding war between the two rivals for pictures of her newborn son, Damian, but as the price soars to £1.5m, OK! and Hello decide to collaborate for the first time, offering Hurley £100,000 to share the pictures. Unhappy with the offer, Hurley refuses.