Mosley v News Group Newspapers [2008] EWHC 1777 (QB)^[1] was an English High Court case in which the former President of the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile, Max Mosley, challenged the News of the World. The newspaper had exposed his involvement in what it called a sadomasochistic sex act involving several female prostitutes when they published a video of the incident recorded by one of the women and published details of the incident in their newspaper, wrongly describing it as "Nazi-themed".^[2] The case resulted in Mosley being awarded £60,000 (approx. US$92,000) in damages.^[3]

The claimant, Max Mosley, had been President of the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile since 1993 as well as being a trustee of its charitable arm the FIA Foundation.^[1] He brought legal action against News Group Newspapers Ltd, the publishers of the News of the World newspaper, complaining about an article by journalist Neville Thurlbeck published on 30 March 2008. The headline of the article was "F1 Boss has Sick Nazi Orgy with Five Hookers".^[4] This was accompanied by the sub-heading "Son of Hitler-loving fascist in sex shame".^[1] Mosley was the son of Oswald Mosley, who was the leader of the 1930s British Union of Fascists. Mosley relied upon an action based upon breach of confidence or the unauthorised disclosure of personal information rather than defamation. Mosley claimed that sexual or sadomasochistic activities were inherently private in nature and that their portrayal was an invasion of privacy by reason of a pre-existing relationship of confidentiality between the participants.^[1]

Mosley's case relied in part on the ruling in the case McKennitt v Ash where there was "breach of confidence by way of conduct inconsistent with a pre-existing relationship, rather than simply of the purloining of private information".^[5] However, Justice David Eady also stated "The law now affords protection to information in respect of which there is a reasonable expectation of privacy, even in circumstances where there is no preexisting relationship giving rise of itself to an enforceable duty of confidence".^[1] He stated that the passing of the Human Rights Act 1998 required this conclusion and that therefore the relevant values in this case were expressed in Articles 8 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as Campbell v MGN Ltd established these values are as much applicable to disputes between two private individuals as where one is a public body. Justice Eady held that the first hurdle was the need to show a reasonable expectation of privacy, and if this could be overcome it was a matter of weighing up the competing Convention rights.^[1]

Mosley challenged the publication of details of his private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in respect to the headline, which read "F1 boss has sick Nazi orgy with five hookers". The defendant argued that the newspaper's right to freedom of expression should prevail because of the public interest in knowing the individual was involved in Nazi roleplay and that irrespective of the Nazi element, the public had a right to know since the individual was FIA President.

However the court ruled that "there was no evidence that the gathering of 28 March 2008 was intended to be an enactment of Nazi behaviour or adoption of any of its attitudes. Nor was it in fact".^[7]

The court ruled that even in cases of adultery, sadomasochistic behaviour was generally not a matter of public interest, but there could be a public interest if the behaviour involved the mocking of Jews or the Holocaust.^[8] However, there was "no genuine basis at all for the suggestion that the participants mocked the victims of the Holocaust". Mosley was awarded damages of £60,000 (about $92,000) from the case, and the court ruled that there was no evidence of a Nazi element to the sex act.^[3]

The case has been criticised due to concerns that it may have a chilling effect on investigative journalism. Media lawyer Mark Stephens expressed such sentiments after the judgment and noted the hefty price that newspapers would pay for getting a "public interest" decision wrong.^[7] Newspapers criticised the judgment, The Sun describing it as "a dark day for British freedom" and a step towards "a dangerous European-style privacy law".^[9] However, lawyer Dan Trench argues that the level of damages awarded in privacy cases will not deter publication,^[10] and the judgment has been met with approval by some commentators and referred to with approval in the Supreme Court in PJS v News Group Newspapers Ltd.^[11][12]

Giving his reaction to the judgment, Mosley stated, "I am delighted with that judgment, which is devastating for the News of the World. It demonstrates that their Nazi lie was completely invented and had no justification".^[3]

After the incident, Mosley sought a confidence vote as President of the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile, which he won by 103 votes to 55.^[13] Mosley stated that his intention to pursue further libel actions in France, Germany and Italy, where newspapers reprinted images of him engaging in sex acts.^[14] In France, criminal proceeding against News Group Newspapers Ltd resulted in a fine of €10,000, plus damages of €7,000 and €15,000 costs for Mosley.

This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (October 2011)

On 29 September 2008, solicitors on behalf of Mosley filed an application to the European Court of Human Rights.^[26][27]

• News of the World phone hacking affair
• Privacy in English law
• CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd