Gray J considered whether an expectation of privacy arose in a letter sent to another person: ‘as a general rule correspondence between A and B on private matters such as their feelings for one another would be a prime candidate for protection.’
Judges:
Gray J
Citations:
[2004] EWHC 1579 (QB), [2005] EMLR 6
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – Maccaba v Lichtenstein QBD 15-Apr-2003
Claims in slander, harassment and breach of confidence. . .
See Also – Maccaba v Lichtenstein (No Special Damage) QBD 2-Jul-2004
Ruling on the application by the Defendant that judgment be entered in his favour in relation to the claim against him in slander. The basis of the application is in short that no special damage is alleged to have been suffered by the Claimant and . .
See Also – Maccaba v Lichtenstein (Privilege) QBD 2-Jul-2004
Ruling on the question whether the slanders of which the Claimant complains in this action were uttered by the Defendant on occasions protected by qualified privilege. . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Information
Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.658106
