Murray v Express Newspapers Plc & Anor [2007] EWHC 1908 (Ch) (07 August 2007)

Murray v Express Newspapers Plc & Anor [2007] EWHC 1908 (Ch) (07 August 2007)

The facts pleaded do not establish a reasonable expectation of privacy or actionable misuse of private information or breach of confidence under English law. The photograph depicted an innocuous public scene, and the claimant, a child, suffered no distress or harm. The law does not recognise a general right not to be photographed in public absent special circumstances. The claim is struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 1908 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: David Murray (by his litigation friends Neil Murray and Joanne Murray); First Defendant: Express Newspapers plc; Second Defendant: Big Pictures (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil / Summary Judgment/strike Out Application Prior to Trial
Outcome
Claim struck out; summary judgment for the defendant (Big Pictures (UK) Limited)
Legal Topics
Breach of Confidence, Misuse of Private Information, Data Protection, Reasonable Expectation of Privacy, Children's Rights, Freedom of Expression
Privacy Law Media Law Human Rights Breach of Confidence Misuse of Private Information Data Protection Reasonable Expectation of Privacy Children's Rights +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Murray (by his litigation friends Neil Murray and Joanne Murray)

Claimant

Express Newspapers plc

First Defendant

Big Pictures (UK) Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Summary Judgment/strike Out Application Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the publication of a photograph of a child taken in a public place without consent constitutes a misuse of private information or breach of confidence
  2. 2 Whether the child had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the circumstances
  3. 3 Whether the claim discloses a legally recognised cause of action under English law or the Data Protection Act 1998

Ratio Decidendi

The facts pleaded do not establish a reasonable expectation of privacy or actionable misuse of private information or breach of confidence under English law. The photograph depicted an innocuous public scene, and the claimant, a child, suffered no distress or harm. The law does not recognise a general right not to be photographed in public absent special circumstances. The claim is struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out; summary judgment for the defendant (Big Pictures (UK) Limited)

Orders

  • Claim against Big Pictures (UK) Limited dismissed
  • No trial on the merits required as the claim discloses no reasonable grounds