A businessman has been awarded damages of £25,000 for misuse of private information after media organisation Bloomberg published an article which identified the businessman as being under investigation by a UK law enforcement body. The judgment follows the precedent set in Richard v BBC, that individuals investigated by law enforcement bodies have a reasonable expectation of privacy as a matter of general principle. The judgment is also a cautionary tale for solicitors to ensure the accuracy of its client's witness statements and their duties to the Court when evidence emerges which may be contrary to earlier findings of fact by the Court.
Much discussion has inevitably followed in the wake of the Cliff Richard judgment, often taking polarising viewpoints. The practical consequences of the judgment are in reality at neither end of this spectrum, but somewhere in between for the reasons explained as follows.
Cliff Richard privacy claim: Court does not depart from case law that suspect in an investigation has reasonable expectation of privacy
Sir Cliff Richard ("Sir Cliff") has been awarded damages of £210,000 for the infringement of his right to privacy. The court decision confirms that where confidential information about a police investigation is leaked to the media, an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy.