High-profile privacy case against media giant

Introduction

In a significant ruling, the High Court addressed costs management issues in a high-profile case involving seven claimants, including notable public figures, against Associated Newspapers Limited. The case, presided over by Mr Justice Nicklin and Senior Master Cook, centred on allegations of misuse of private information and breach of confidence.

Background

The claimants, comprising Baroness Lawrence, Elizabeth Hurley, Sir Elton John, David Furnish, Sir Simon Hughes, Prince Harry, and Sadie Frost, alleged that their private information was misused by the defendant. The case also involved a claim for breach of confidence by Baroness Lawrence. The defendant, Associated Newspapers, strenuously denied these allegations.

Costs Management Hearing

The court's task was to approve and set a budget for litigation costs, a process known as costs management. During a two-day hearing, the court scrutinised the proposed budgets, which collectively amounted to over £38.8 million. The court found these sums to be manifestly excessive and disproportionate.

Key Issues

The court identified several reasons for the excessive costs. These included large contingency sums for potential applications, high hourly rates charged by the defendant's solicitors, and significant overlap in the claimants' cases. Additionally, the court noted the claimants' legal teams had considerable experience from previous related litigation, which should have reduced costs.

Court's Decision

The court resolved to manage the litigation with a focus on proportionality and reasonableness. A trial was scheduled for January 2026, with interim case management conferences planned. The court required the claimants to prepare amended budgets detailing individual and common costs.

Costs Sharing Order

To address cost management, the court invited the parties to draft a costs sharing provision. This would allow for a single budget for the claimants and another for the defendant, facilitating transparency and control over budgeted costs.

Budget Approval

The court approved total budgeted costs of £4,084,000 for the claimants and £4,445,000 for the defendant. These figures were based on reasonable and proportionate costs for each phase of the litigation, including disclosure, witness statements, and trial preparation.

Conclusion

This ruling underscores the court's commitment to ensuring litigation costs remain within reasonable and proportionate limits. The decision highlights the importance of effective costs management in complex legal disputes, particularly those involving high-profile claimants and significant public interest.

Learn More

To explore essential areas of UK privacy law, see BeCivil's guide to English Data Protection Law.

Copyright & permissions