The Press and Journal (Inverness, Highlands, and Islands)
Cliff seeks damages from BBC
Lawyers for singer claim compensation due at ‘very top end of the scale’
Sir Cliff Richard’s lawyers have told a High Court judge that the singer should get compensation at the “very top end of the scale” because BBC coverage of a police raid on his home caused him “great damage”.
The 77-year-old singer has sued the BBC over coverage of the raid – which followed a sex assault allegation.
Sir Cliff, who denied the allegation and was not charged with any offence, says he suffered “profound and long-lasting damage” as a result of coverage.
BBC editors have said they will “defend ourselves vigorously”.
Mr Justice Mann began overseeing a trial yesterday, expected to last 10 days, at the High Court in London.
A barrister leading Sir Cliff ’s legal team told Mr Justice Mann that BBC coverage of the search at the singer’s apartment in Sunningdale, Berkshire, in August 2014 was a “very serious invasion” of privacy.
Justin Rushbrooke QC told how coverage had a “prolonged impact” on Sir Cliff.
He did not give any indication of the amount Sir Cliff wanted.
But Mr Justice Mann heard that the singer had
“Coverage of a police raid on his home caused him great damage”
already agreed to accept a £400,000 payment from the force which carried out the search.
Sir Cliff, who was abroad when the raid took place, had initially sued the BBC and South Yorkshire Police.
Mr Justice Mann was told in May 2017 how that dispute had been settled after the force agreed to pay the singer “substantial” damages.
The judge has now been given the figure by lawyers representing the force at the trial.
“We think it is hard to imagine a case of publicity about a suspect in a police investigation which could have caused greater damage to the autonomy and dignity of the claimant,” said Mr Rushbrooke.
He added: “We say this is a claim for an award at the very top end of the scale.”
A BBC spokesman has said that the BBC had reported Sir Cliff ’s “full denial of the allegations at every stage”.
“In a nutshell, it is Sir Cliff ’s case that the BBC’s coverage of the search was an invasion – indeed a very serious invasion – of his privacy for which there was no lawful justification,” Mr Rushbrooke told the judge.
He said Sir Cliff was entitled to “very substantial” damages or compensation to reflect the “flagrant way” the BBC went about “breaching his rights”.