HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Limited

HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Limited

The claimant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the letter's contents, which were not in the public domain prior to publication. The publication of large parts of the letter was not necessary or proportionate to correct inaccuracies in the People article and was a manifestly excessive interference with her privacy. The copyright in the letter was infringed, and neither fair dealing nor public interest defences applied. There was no real prospect of the defendant's case succeeding at trial, and summary judgment was appropriate.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: HRH The Duchess of Sussex; Defendant/appellant: Associated Newspapers Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment in the High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; summary judgment for claimant upheld
Legal Topics
Misuse of Private Information, Copyright Infringement, Freedom of Expression, Summary Judgment, Public Interest Defence, Fair Dealing, Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
Privacy Law Copyright Law Media Law Misuse of Private Information Copyright Infringement Freedom of Expression Summary Judgment Public Interest Defence +2 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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HRH The Duchess of Sussex

Claimant/respondent

Associated Newspapers Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment in the High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of the letter to her father
  2. 2 Whether the publication of the letter was necessary and proportionate to correct inaccuracies in the public domain
  3. 3 Whether the publication infringed the claimant's copyright

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the letter's contents, which were not in the public domain prior to publication. The publication of large parts of the letter was not necessary or proportionate to correct inaccuracies in the People article and was a manifestly excessive interference with her privacy. The copyright in the letter was infringed, and neither fair dealing nor public interest defences applied. There was no real prospect of the defendant's case succeeding at trial, and summary judgment was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; summary judgment for claimant upheld

Orders

  • New evidence admitted
  • Summary judgment for claimant on privacy and copyright claims confirmed