The Court of Appeal has concurred with the High Court that the publication of private information relevant to an individual's character was justified where the public was entitled to consider his fitness for high public office.
In this case, a prominent elected male politician was the subject of a Daily Mail article in July 2010 which centred on him having an extramarital affair with another woman about nine months before her child was born.
The child, who was born in November 2009, claimed damages and an injunction against the Daily Mail for the breach of her privacy.
She was awarded £15,000 damages for the breach of her privacy by the Daily Mail for publishing pictures of the child in her buggy with her mother alongside the articles on the child's paternity and the Daily Mail agreed not to republish the photographs.
However, the High Court held that her privacy in respect of her paternity was reduced by the claims that her mother had made public about the issue, and was outweighed by the public interest in the matter, and therefore that the publication of the issue was justified. The High Court also said that it would not grant an injunction because it would serve no real purpose as so much information about the matter was already in the public domain.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
