Various 3rd Wave Claimants v MGN Ltd

Various 3rd Wave Claimants v MGN Ltd

Some articles were struck out or summary judgment granted where the information was disclosed by the claimant, was aired in open court, or was too trivial to attract privacy protection. For other articles, the absence of positive evidence from the defendant as to the source, and the need for disclosure, meant that summary judgment or strikeout was inappropriate at this stage. Prior publication alone does not justify strikeout. Claims based solely on publication of information already in the public domain or disclosed by the claimant are not maintainable as misuse of private information.

Parties
Claimants/respondents: Various 3rd Wave Claimants; Defendant/applicant: MGN Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Privacy/misuse of Private Information / Summary Judgment and Strikeout Application
Outcome
Partially allowed
Legal Topics
Misuse of Private Information, Summary Judgment, Strikeout Applications, Prior Publication, Open Justice, Damages for Privacy Invasion

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 23 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Various 3rd Wave Claimants

Claimants/respondents

MGN Limited

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Privacy/misuse of Private Information / Summary Judgment and Strikeout Application

  1. 1 Whether certain articles pleaded by claimants should be struck out or disposed of by summary judgment as not disclosing a viable cause of action for misuse of private information
  2. 2 Whether prior publication or disclosure in open court destroys privacy rights
  3. 3 Whether the articles were the product of unlawful information gathering

Ratio Decidendi

Some articles were struck out or summary judgment granted where the information was disclosed by the claimant, was aired in open court, or was too trivial to attract privacy protection. For other articles, the absence of positive evidence from the defendant as to the source, and the need for disclosure, meant that summary judgment or strikeout was inappropriate at this stage. Prior publication alone does not justify strikeout. Claims based solely on publication of information already in the public domain or disclosed by the claimant are not maintainable as misuse of private information.

Court Disposition

Partially allowed

Orders

  • Summary judgment or strikeout granted in respect of certain articles where information was disclosed by the claimant, aired in open court, or too trivial to be actionable.
  • Applications dismissed in respect of other articles; those claims survive to trial.