The High Court last week ordered the News of the World (NotW) to
pay £60,000 in damages after it published a newspaper article and
an online video which the court said violated Moseley's right to
privacy.
Moseley had paid women to spank him in what the NotW claimed was
a Nazi themed orgy. Mosely is the son of Oswald Moseley, the leader
of the British fascists in the 1930s and 1940s.
Moseley disputed the Nazi claims and argued that the 'party' was
private. Mr Justice Eady in the High Court found that the NotW had
not proved the Nazi link, and therefore there was no public
interest in the publication of what he said were details of a
private matter.
"The Claimant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in
relation to sexual activities (albeit unconventional) carried on
between consenting adults on private property," he said in his
judgment. "There was no public interest or other justification for
the clandestine recording, for the publication of the resulting
information and still photographs, or for the placing of the video
extracts on the News of the World website – all of this on a
massive scale."
"There was bondage, beating and domination which seem to be
typical of S and M behaviour… of course, I accept that such
behaviour is viewed by some people with distaste and moral
disapproval, but in the light of modern rights-based jurisprudence
that does not provide any justification for the intrusion on the
personal privacy of the Claimant," he ruled.
Litigation expert Damian Crosse of Pinsent Masons, the law firm
behind OUT-LAW, said that the case would change the way that
newspapers would have to approach such stories in the future.
"The legal impact of the case is very considerable. It is a
major blow to a newspapers right to freedom of expression and in
particular the kind of stories that are so frequently found in the
redtops relating to the sexual activities of a sports person or
other celebrity," he said. "In future any such stories will be in
danger of being found to be in breach of the individual's right to
privacy which is a fairly new concept introduced into English law
by European legislation."
Traditionally there has been no right to privacy in the UK but
the introduction of the European Convention on Human Rights to UK
law via the Human Rights Act has led to a number of rulings
establishing privacy protections.
The Human Rights Act and the Convention guarantee the protection
of an individual's right to "respect for his private and family
life". Cases involving model Naomi Campbell, actors Michael Douglas
and Catherine Zeta Jones and new age singer Loreena McKennit have
used this stipulation to protect celebrities' privacy.
Crosse said, though, that the Mosely ruling was more explicit
than the protections given to celebrities.
"Earlier cases such as the Naomi Cambell and Douglas's case have
tended to skip round the central issue of an individual's right to
privacy. In both these cases the individuals were successful but
their damages were very low, £3,500 and £14,000 respectively," he
said. "Mosley was awarded £60,000 which is the largest ever damages
award for a breach of privacy case."
Though Mr Justice Eady insisted in his ruling that this was not
a 'landmark' case, Crosse said that it will force newspapers to
change.
"The most important aspect of the case was the fact the judge
could see no public interest in the newspaper's decision to publish
the story. Max Mosley was not sufficiently high profile a figure
and in any event his sexual activities had no public interest
element whatsoever," said Crosse.
