Page 132 - Law and the Media

Breach of Confidence
to his employer, and that he is not making the disclosure for personal gain. As a result, an
employee who sells information to the media will not benefit from the protection of the
Public Interest Disclosure Act. However, an employee who provides information to
the media without reward may be protected. In such circumstances, the court will consider
the seriousness of the matter in determining whether disclosure was reasonable.

A member of the media who publishes information disclosed under the Public Interest
Disclosure Act will not be protected by the legislation. Media publications are subject to the
general principles of the law of confidence.

Relationship of confider and confidant
More often, the obligation arises by virtue of a relationship between the ‘confider’ and the
‘confidant’. Whether or not a relationship is confidential depends on all the circumstances.
It should be remembered that the issue of confidentiality will only arise if the information
exchanged is of a confidential nature.

Husband and wife
The law will not permit the revelation of anything confided by one spouse to the other during
a marriage. The protection of matrimonial secrets is based on the sanctity of marriage.

In Argyll v Argyll (1967), the Duke of Argyll intended to reveal secrets of his marriage to the
Duchess to the press. The marriage had ended in divorce because of the adultery of the
Duchess. Although she had already published allegations of drug-taking about him, she was
still granted an injunction. The court held:

There could hardly be anything more intimate or confidential than is involved in
that relationship, or than in the mutual trust and confidences which are shared
between husband and wife. The confidential nature of the relationship is of its very
essence.

However, matrimonial secrets may be published if the confidence of the whole marriage has
been destroyed (Lennon v News Group Newspapers (1978)).

Other sexual relationships
The protection afforded to matrimonial confidences has been extended to other sexual
relationships. In Stephens v Avery (1988) the claimant, a married woman, successfully sued
her friend Mrs Avery, the editor of the Mail on Sunday Stewart Steven, and Mail Newspapers
plc for damages for breach of confidence after the Mail on Sunday published details of her
sexual relationship with another woman who had been the victim of a sensational murder.
The court held there was no reason why information relating to sexual matters should not be
the subject of an enforceable duty of confidence. Most people would regard information
relating to their sex lives as high on their list of confidential matters.
95