November 2003
Hello! OK with Damages Awarded to Catherine Zeta-Jones and Michael Douglas, but Unhappy at Amount Awarded to Rival.
After numerous appearances in the Royal Courts of Justice, intense media interest and millions spent on legal costs, the legal action brought against Hello! magazine by OK!, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Michael Douglas is finally nearing its end. The overall winner at this stage (the decision as to costs is yet to be reached) would appear to be OK! who have received £1,033,156 in damages from Hello!. This sum covers the financial loss as calculated by the court, accounting for wasted costs, lost sales and advertising revenue caused by the publication by Hello! of photographs of Catherine Zeta-Jones and Michael Douglas' wedding that were obtained in breach of confidence.
Although the decision on the facts and law of the case found in favour of Zeta-Jones and Douglas, they did not receive damages on the scale that they had claimed. The couple had claimed £500,000 for financial loss and £50,000 each for distress. The claim for financial loss, based on an amount that would have been paid by Hello! had a licence been granted to them to take photographs at the wedding, was not awarded to Zeta-Jones and Douglas, but held to be an alternative to the calculation of damages to OK!. The couple were awarded £3,750 each for distress and £7,000 for wasted costs, as well as £50 each for breach of their rights under the Data Protection Act 1998, a total of £14,600. After the judgment, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Michael Douglas claimed the action had been a matter of principle and donated the damages awarded to charity. Although the damages appear small, when considering the probable costs and total damages, the principle, whether it be privacy as initially pleaded or the protection of confidential information as awarded, appears to be an expensive one.
Briffa Comment:
A high profile case such as this shows the unpredictable and expensive nature of litigation. In a case as novel as this one, the outcome is even more difficult to predict. The cause of action and, subsequently, the measure of damages were unclear until the court decided which if any of the claimants' rights had been breached. In the event, the law of confidential information, usually seen as a commercial right, was the basis upon which the case was decided. For a judge to award £50,000 to each claimant for distress caused as a consequence of a breach of confidence would have been somewhat surprising. However, to have predicted this from the outset would have been difficult, making an assessment of the likely award extremely difficult. Before embarking on the road to court, it is important to consider all the alternatives and make sure that they are examined thoroughly.