Douglas & Ors v Hello! Ltd.& Ors

Douglas & Ors v Hello! Ltd.& Ors

The pleadings disclose a good arguable case that Mr Ramey participated in a common design with other defendants to obtain and publish unauthorised photographs in breach of confidence and privacy, and that publication in England is the actionable wrong. There is also a good arguable case under the Data Protection Act 1998. The claimants are entitled to serve Mr Ramey out of the jurisdiction.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Michael Douglas; Claimant/appellant: Catherine Zeta-Jones; Claimant/appellant: Northern & Shell PLC; 1st Defendant/intervener: Hello! Limited; 2nd Defendant/intervener: Hola S.A.; 3rd Defendant/intervener: Eduardo Sanchez Junco; 4th Defendant: The Marquesa de Varela; 5th Defendant: Neneta Overseas Limited; 6th Defendant/respondent: Philip Ramey
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order Setting Aside Service Out of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Breach of Confidence, Right to Privacy, Jurisdiction, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Data Protection Act 1998, Joint Tortfeasance, Unlawful Means Conspiracy
Civil Procedure Tort Law Privacy Law Data Protection Breach of Confidence Right to Privacy Jurisdiction Service Out of Jurisdiction +3 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Douglas

Claimant/appellant

Catherine Zeta-Jones

Claimant/appellant

Northern & Shell PLC

Claimant/appellant

Hello! Limited

1st Defendant/intervener

Hola S.A.

2nd Defendant/intervener

Eduardo Sanchez Junco

3rd Defendant/intervener

The Marquesa de Varela

4th Defendant

Neneta Overseas Limited

5th Defendant

Philip Ramey

6th Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order Setting Aside Service Out of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants have a good arguable case against Mr Ramey to justify service out of the jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether the pleadings disclose a reasonable cause of action for breach of confidence, privacy, economic torts, and breach of statutory duty under the Data Protection Act 1998 against Mr Ramey
  3. 3 Whether English law applies to the alleged wrongs

Ratio Decidendi

The pleadings disclose a good arguable case that Mr Ramey participated in a common design with other defendants to obtain and publish unauthorised photographs in breach of confidence and privacy, and that publication in England is the actionable wrong. There is also a good arguable case under the Data Protection Act 1998. The claimants are entitled to serve Mr Ramey out of the jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Claimants’ appeal allowed
  • Order as per counsel’s agreed Minute of Order