Law firm Brabners LLP has just issued a claim in the Chancery Division of the High Court against the Sun on behalf of client Ben Stokes. The claim is for misuse of private information in relation to an article run by the outlet which examined elements of the cricketers family life. Continue reading
Following issuing a strong statement denouncing the British Press on 01 October 2019 Prince Harry has launched his own legal claim against news outlets the Sun, News of the World and Daily Mirror for phone hacking.
The case comes following his spouse Meghan Markle issuing proceedings against the Mail on Sunday on grounds of misuse of private information, breach of copyright and the Data Protection Act 2018.
Many practitioners will be aware of the leading phone hacking case of Gulati, which covered historic News of the World phone hacking. This set the bar for damages at £10,000 per year of serious phone hacking. The case set out standardised elements and covered awards for a variety of famous claimants.
Prince Harry is set to be the latest of these claimants in a series of litigation the likes which is unprecedented from the Royal Family. It is now apparent why his statement was so strong worded. This is the most significant action of the Royal Family against the press to date.
Many will have heard of the Sun’s recent egregious intrusion into the private and family life of cricketer Ben Stokes. The offending article by the Sun delves into the family life of the famous cricketer in a manner which could be seen to breach the privacy rights of Stokes and his family.
The incident has placed the conduct of English journalists, particularly the Sun, under the spotlight. INFORRM has an excellent post on the issue.
Stokes statement on the article, released on Twitter, can be found here.
Many will also be aware of the exposing of rugby player Gareth Thomas’ HIV status following black mail attempts. This move is highly invasive and could be considered a misuse of private information.
The Independent Press Standards Organisation has commented on the incidents. This notes how the Editor’s Code operates to protect individuals in such scenarios and condemns the sensationalist headlines of articles intruding upon privacy rights.