In a case which could have serious repercussions for online and
offline media law the High Court has ruled that the wife of the
celebrity adulterer should be protected from the publication of the
details of the affair.
The identities of all parties has been kept secret. The husband
was referred to as AB, the celebrity adulterer, believed to be a
figure from the world of sport, as CC.
Justice Eady ruled that the privacy rights of CC's wife under
the European Convention of Human Rights would be infringed by AB's
revelations about their affair.
"In personal and sexual relationships the courts have for some
time recognised that there is what is now generally referred to as
a reasonable or legitimate 'expectation of privacy'," said Eady in
his ruling.
The case involved a balancing of competing EHCR rights, said
Eady: that of CC's wife to privacy and that of AB to freedom of
expression. Eady said that he had to make sure that his judgments
were free of personal moral bias.
"It is not for judges when applying the European Convention,
which is a secular code applying to those of all religions and
none, to give an appearance of sanctimony by damning adulterers or
seeking, as I was invited to do by Mr Bartley Jones, to 'vindicate'
the state of matrimony," he said.
In assessing the free speech rights of AB, Eady said that not
all speech was of equal value and due equal protection. "The
communication of material to the world at large in which there is a
genuine public interest is naturally to be rated more highly than
the right to sell what is mere 'tittle-tattle'," he said.
Eady was particularly concerned with the effects that any
publicity would have on CC's wife. She was said to be suffering
stress and anxiety which requires medical attention and the court
heard that she had talked of committing suicide.
"If I come to the conclusion that, in order to protect [CC's
family life], it is necessary to prevent the Defendant going
directly or indirectly to the media for no better reason than
spite, money-making or 'tittle tattle', then I would be obliged to
restrain him. The fact that he may be, or may see himself as, an
'injured party' does not accord him a special status, not given to
others, which inherently raises the value of the communications he
wishes to make to the tabloids on to some higher plane or renders
them more valuable in Article 10 terms," said Eady.
The court issued a temporary injunction stopping AB from
communicating with the media directly or indirectly or publishing
on the internet any details of the affair.
