Richard v British Broadcasting Corporation & Anor

Richard v British Broadcasting Corporation & Anor

The court held that the statement in open court reflected the agreed position of the settling parties, did not unfairly misrepresent the BBC’s case, and did not prejudice the BBC’s ongoing defence. The objections raised by the BBC were not sufficient to refuse permission, as the statement was not abusive, unfair, or misleading, and the settlement procedure should not be infiltrated by collateral disputes.

Parties
Claimant: Sir Cliff Richard, OBE; First Defendant: The British Broadcasting Corporation; Second Defendant: Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Judgment on Permission to Read Statement in Open Court Following Partial Settlement
Outcome
Permission granted for the statement in open court to be read as proposed by the claimant and SYP, with minor amendments.
Legal Topics
Misuse of Private Information, Breach of Article 8 ECHR, Breach of Data Protection Act 1998, Media Reporting, Police Disclosure, Settlement Procedure
Privacy Defamation Data Protection Human Rights Misuse of Private Information Breach of Article 8 ECHR Breach of Data Protection Act 1998 Media Reporting +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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sir Cliff Richard, OBE

Claimant

The British Broadcasting Corporation

First Defendant

Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Judgment on Permission to Read Statement in Open Court Following Partial Settlement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statement in open court between claimant and SYP should be permitted over BBC's objections
  2. 2 Fairness and accuracy of references to BBC and its reporter in the statement
  3. 3 Potential prejudice to BBC's ongoing defence

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the statement in open court reflected the agreed position of the settling parties, did not unfairly misrepresent the BBC’s case, and did not prejudice the BBC’s ongoing defence. The objections raised by the BBC were not sufficient to refuse permission, as the statement was not abusive, unfair, or misleading, and the settlement procedure should not be infiltrated by collateral disputes.

Court Disposition

Permission granted for the statement in open court to be read as proposed by the claimant and SYP, with minor amendments.

Orders

  • Statement in open court may be read in the form agreed between claimant and SYP, incorporating minor amendments.
  • BBC’s objections dismissed.