Oliver Smith: Celebrities the losers as tide of legal precedent turns again

Thursday 29 September 2011 19:00 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

This case is the latest in a line of actions to test the boundaries of privacy rights. It started in 2004 with the lengthy battle between Mirror Group Newspapers and Naomi Campbell after MGN published a story with photos of the model leaving Narcotics Anonymous, saying that she was being hypocritical in pretending that she did not take drugs and was a public role model. Campbell sued for breach of her privacy and data protection rights. She won in the High Court, lost in the Court of Appeal and won in the then House of Lords (now The Supreme Court) by a 3-2 majority. The judges said the sensitive nature of her treatment should not have been disclosed.

The House of Lords then decided that the ECHR's wider interpretation of a private and family life applied in English law. This has been used by celebrities such as John Terry in cases that were a turning point in rationalising the extent of celebrity privacy.

MGN challenged the House of Lords decision on Campbell in the ECHR but could not persuade it that the photographs and details of her drug use were necessary to make the story credible. The judge, however, accepted that Ferdinand put himself in a position as a role model and that the kiss-and-tell story contributed to legitimate debate on the footballer's suitability for the role and so was in the public interest.

Oliver Smith is a solicitor at Keystone Law

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in