header-logo header-logo

07 June 2007 / Anna Caddick
Issue: 7276 / Categories: Features , Media
printer mail-detail

Show me the money!

Where does Douglas v Hello! leave the law of confidence? Anna Caddick investigates

On 2 May 2007, the House of Lords (split 3-2) found in favour of OK! magazine in the long-running case of Douglas v Hello! [2007] UKHL 21, [2007] All ER (D) 44 (May). After six years, the Law Lords have given the final word: Hello! is liable to OK! for £1,033,156 lost profits caused through spoiling OK!’s exclusive for the Catherine Zeta-Jones/Michael Douglas wedding. OK! failed in its claim for the tort of intentionally causing loss by unlawful means, but won on the law of confidence. The overwhelming majority of the 96-page judgment deals with economic torts. This article examines only the confidence action, which was sidelined.

OK! contracted with the Douglases to publish exclusive photographs of their 2000 New York wedding. The wedding had heavy security and guests were not permitted to take photographs. Despite this, a paparazzo crashed and took some bad quality photographs. Hello! published them on the same day that OK! published its exclusive. Mr Justice Lindsay found that Hello! was liable to OK! (as well as

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll