Model Data Is Processed But Unprotected

The Court of Appeal for the first time considers the Data Protection Act 1998

Earlier this year the supermodel Naomi Campbell brought proceedings against Mirror Group Newspapers ("MGN") for breach of confidentiality and compensation under Section 13 of the Data Protection Act 1998 ("the DPA") in respect of articles and photographs published in the Daily Mirror newspaper. The articles related to the model's drug addiction and attendance at Narcotics Anonymous meetings in circumstances where she had previously asserted that she did not take drugs. As we have commented previously, at first instance the court held that Miss Campbell was entitled to damages for breach of confidentiality and to compensation for breach of the DPA.

MGN appealed to the Court of Appeal, which on 14th October ruled in MGN's favour. It held that the information published by the Mirror did not breach a duty of confidence owed to Miss Campbell and that, in any event, publication was justifiable in the public interest. Further, whilst the DPA applied to the publication of newspapers, MGN were entitled to rely on the exemption afforded by the DPA for journalistic purposes.

Confidentiality

Miss Campbell had conceded that because of her previous public assertions that she did not take drugs, the Mirror was entitled to publish the fact that she was a drug addict and that she was undergoing treatment. Therefore, her claim solely related to additional information conveyed in the newspaper articles which gave details of her therapy sessions with Narcotics Anonymous and photographs which showed her outside a Narcotics Anonymous meeting.

The Court of Appeal held that these additional details were merely peripheral to the issue of her drug taking and as such their disclosure was not "sufficiently significant" to amount to a breach of duty of confidence. Further, the information published by the Mirror was justified in order to provide a factual account which had the detail necessary to carry credibility. It was part of the "journalistic package" designed to show that Miss Campbell had deceived the public by claiming that she did not take drugs. Accordingly, even if the information had been "sufficiently significant" and even though its disclosure was arguably not necessary, MGN was nevertheless entitled on public interest grounds to include it in the article.

Data Protection Act

Miss Campbell claimed compensation under section 13 DPA for the damage and distress caused to her...