Background
5RB - Leading barristers' chambers specialising in all areas of Media & Communications Law

Kaye v Robertson & Sport Newspapers Ltd

Reference:
[1991] FSR 62; The Times 21 March 1990
Court:
Court of Appeal
Judge:
Glidewell, Bingham and Leggatt LJJ
Date of Judgment:
16/03/1990
Summary:

Privacy – Malicious falsehood – Trespass – Whether cause of action available to the plaintiff – Photographs – Injunctions

Appearances:
Kaye v Robertson & Sport Newspapers Ltd (Defendant)
Instructing Solicitors:
Wright Webb Syrett for the Plaintiff; Kaye Tesler & Co for the Defendant

The plaintiff was a well known actor recovering in hospital from a serious injury. Two journalists gained access to his private room, took photographs and conducted an interview. They threatened to publish the interview, and P sought an injunction.

Whether P had a cause of action which would enable the Court to grant an injunction

Any article which conveyed the meaning that the plaintiff had given informed consent to the interview would amount to malicious falsehood. There was no actionable right of privacy in English law.

The statement of the Court of Appeal that there was no common law protection of privacy stultified the development of privacy law for many years. The position changed following the incorporation of the Human Rights Act but the House of Lords recently re-affirmed that there was no general law of privacy under the common law in Wainwright v Home Office.


Resources

Search Resources

Register for 5RB updates

Click below to sign up for updates

Register

Portfolio Builder

Select the our work that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download    Add to portfolio   
Portfolio
Title Type CV Email

Remove All

Download


Click here to share this shortlist.
(It will expire after 30 days.)