Page 138 - Law and the Media

Breach of Confidence
The Church of the Latter Day Saints failed to prevent publication of information relating to
Scientology. The court found that the public is entitled to information about ‘cults’ (Hubbard
v Vosper (1972)).

In 1993 the court decided it was in the public interest for the views of the former Prime
Minister Baroness Thatcher about current government ministers to be published. The Daily
Mirror obtained an early copy of Thatcher’s autobiography and published selected extracts
before the official release of the book and its ‘exclusive’ serialization in the Sunday Times.
Both the Sunday Times and the publishers of the book, Harper Collins Publishers Ltd, tried
and failed to obtain an injunction against the Daily Mirror. The Court of Appeal found that
the opinion of the former Prime Minister about her successor and his colleagues was clearly
a matter of public interest (Times Newspapers Ltd v MGN Ltd (1993)).
Although difficulties do exist in raising the defence of public interest, under Section
12(4)(a)(ii) of the Human Rights Act 1998 the court must now have regard to the public
interest when considering whether or not to grant an injunction to restrain publication.
The issues the media should consider before publication in respect of the defence of public
interest are similar to those raised by the defence of iniquity:

How grave is the matter revealed?
How likely to be true is the information?
Ought the information to be published to the public at large?

6.4 Procedure

6.4.1 The action

The procedure in an action for breach of confidence is, for the most part, the same as an
action for defamation (see Chapter 1).

6.4.2 Interim injunctions

Importance
It is normal for a claimant in an action for breach of confidence to apply for an interim
injunction under the Civil Procedure Rules Part 25.1(1)(a). An interim injunction is usually
the most important aspect of a claim for breach of confidence. Once information is published
by the media, its confidentiality is gone for ever. No damages can properly compensate its
former owner. The court is therefore often prepared to prevent publication by way of an
interim injunction pending trial. In such circumstances, the interests of the publisher take
second place to the interests of the owner of the confidential information.

In fact, very few actions for breach of confidence actually proceed to trial. Victory at the
interim injunction stage is usually decisive, which is why evidence and arguments should be
101