The media will be walking on eggshells

Media organisations warn press freedom and the public’s right to know will be seriously compromised after Sir Cliff Richard won his landmark privacy case against the BBC.

Ian Murray, executive director of the Society of Editors, said: “The ruling to make it unlawful that anyone under investigation can be named is a major step and one that has worrying consequences for press freedom and the public’s right to know.”

Mr Murray asked how the media would be able to “police the police” in future. He said: “It is vital that the actions of the police should be kept under scrutiny in a free society and this change in the law will make that much harder.”

Mark Stephens, a leading media lawyer, said “This is a record damages award for a single invasion of privacy and it creates a major problem for police and journalists. The police often need the media when investigating to help find information which exculpates or incriminates a subject. What if a teacher was arrested on child abuse charges? Where do you draw the line on a person’s right to privacy if their home is raided? It will have to go to the Court of Appeal.”

Charlotte Harris, media law specialist at Kingsley Napley, who represented a number of phone-hacking victims, said: “This is the first time that a court has held that the subject of a criminal investigation has a reasonable expectation of privacy. The fact of a criminal investigation does not give rise to a public interest of publicity. It will be harder for the media to justify naming an individual ahead of charge unless the police do so for operational reasons. Police and the media will have to be much more cautious. “

Nicola Cain, a partner at law firm RPC, said:“this is a landmark judgment in many ways – all of which are bad for the media. The media is going to have to walk on eggshells when reporting on police investigations from now on.”