Cliff case cost BBC at least £1.5m... and it can’t appeal
THE BBC received a fresh blow in its legal battle with Sir Cliff Richard yesterday after it was refused permission to appeal the case which has already cost it £1.5 million.
Mr Justice Mann declined to give the broadcaster permission to appeal a landmark court ruling that its coverage of a police search of the singer’s home was a breach of his privacy.
BBC executives must now decide whether to launch a formal application to challenge the ruling to the Court of Appeal, at further cost to licence fee payers. The high-profile legal action has already cost the BBC at least £1.5million in damages and legal fees.
The broadcaster argued that the High Court judgment had struck a blow against Press freedom and risked undermining journalists’ ability to report police investigations. Lawyers for Sir Cliff said the broadcaster should consider if it was acting in the interests of licence fee payers, and it was ‘about time the BBC took a realistic view’.
The 77-year-old singer sued over the BBC’s coverage of a 2014 police raid on his home in Sunningdale, Berkshire, after a historic child sex allegation was made against him.
Sir Cliff was never arrested or charged with any offence but said he felt ‘forever tainted’ by the BBC’s decision to name him in its coverage, and to film the police search from a helicopter.
Mr Justice Mann ruled the broadthe caster was guilty of a serious infringement of Sir Cliff’s privacy and ordered it to pay him £210,000 in damages and his legal costs.
The total bill for the BBC is not yet known, as lawyers for Sir Cliff have argued he is entitled to further damages to compensate him for the loss of a book deal and money spent on public relations in an attempt to protect his reputation.
Speaking after the ruling last week, Sir Cliff said a handful of BBC managers had acted as his ‘judge, jury and executioner’, and he revealed he had spent £4 million pursuing the broadcaster through the courts.
A spokesman for the BBC said it had not made a final decision on whether to pursue an appeal.
He added: ‘We reiterate that we are very sorry to Sir Cliff for the distress caused and have no desire to prolong this case unnecessarily, but ruling has raised significant questions for Press freedom and we are considering the best way to address these.’
A request for an appeal would require the BBC to show it has a realistic chance of overturning the ruling, or a ‘compelling reason’ why its arguments should be heard.
Gavin Millar QC, for the BBC, said the unprecedentedly high damages awarded to Sir Cliff already risked a ‘chilling effect’ on Press freedom because it could deter future public interest reporting.
The BBC was ordered to pay Sir Cliff £190,000 in damages for the distress caused by its reports of the police search, and a further £20,000 for ‘aggravated damages’ because it submitted its reporting for a ‘Scoop of the Year’ prize at the Royal Television Society awards, which caused the singer further anguish.
The star has also asked for ‘special damages’ to cover the £108,500 he spent on public relations experts to limit the damage to his reputation, and an undisclosed payout to recompense him for a book deal for his autobiography, which was withdrawn after the BBC story broke.
The special damages are expected to exceed £347,000, not including the book deal, and are due to be decided later, meaning the full amount to be paid by the BBC will not be known for months. It will also have to pay a share of Sir Cliff’s £4 million legal costs, and will also have to contribute towards the £400,000 in damages which South Yorkshire Police has agreed to pay.
‘The ruling has raised questions’