Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd
The publication of an article and video about the private sexual activities of a public figure was a misuse of private information, and there was no public interest justification because the allegation of a Nazi theme was untrue.
Facts
Max Mosley was president of the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile, the governing body of Formula One. The News of the World published an article, together with a video on its website, about a private party at which Mr Mosley engaged in consensual sadomasochistic activities with several women, under the headline that he had had a sick Nazi orgy. The video had been secretly recorded by one of the participants, who had been paid by the newspaper. Mr Mosley sued for breach of confidence and misuse of private information.
Legal principle
Eady J held that the newspaper was liable. He said that Mr Mosley had a reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to sexual activities between consenting adults on private property, and that there was no public interest in the publication, because there was no evidence that the activities had a Nazi or concentration camp theme, which might have raised a question of public interest in view of Mr Mosley's position. The court awarded Mr Mosley 60,000 pounds, which was at the time the largest award for invasion of privacy, but held that exemplary damages were not available. Mr Mosley later complained to the European Court of Human Rights that English law should require newspapers to notify the subject before publication, but the court held in Mosley v United Kingdom that article 8 did not require that.
Related cases on compensation, enforcement and misuse of private information
- Bloomberg LP v ZXC [2022] UKSC 5, [2022] AC 1158
- Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] UKHL 22, [2004] 2 AC 457
- Douglas v Hello! Ltd (No 3) [2007] UKHL 21, [2008] 1 AC 1
- Halliday v Creation Consumer Finance Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 333
- Lloyd v Google LLC [2021] UKSC 50, [2022] AC 1217
- PJS v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2016] UKSC 26, [2016] AC 1081
- Richard v British Broadcasting Corporation [2018] EWHC 1837 (Ch)
- Rolfe v Veale Wasbrough Vizards LLP [2021] EWHC 2809 (QB)
Studying data protection and technology law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
