Key Facts
- •Covert recording of naked images of the Claimant and their subsequent publication on a pornographic website.
- •The Defendant was convicted of voyeurism.
- •Claimant suffered chronic PTSD and an enduring personality change as a result.
- •The Defendant did not appear or defend the claim.
- •Claim brought under intentional infliction of injury, infringement of privacy, and breach of confidence.
Legal Principles
Assessment of damages for intentional infliction of harm, infringement of privacy, and breach of confidence.
Judicial College Guidelines 2022, ABC and WH v Willock [2015] EWHC 2687, MGN Limited v Representative Claimants [2015] EWCA Civ 1291, Reid v Price [2020] EWHC 594 (QB), Bell v Desporte [2019] EWHC 1650 (QB), Bloomberg LP v ZXC [2022] UKSC
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992: Prohibition on publication of victim's identity in sexual offence cases.
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992
Civil Procedure Rule 39.3: Court's discretion to proceed in a defendant's absence.
Civil Procedure Rule 39.3
Outcomes
Judgment for the Claimant on liability.
Defendant failed to provide a defence.
General damages of £60,000 awarded.
Chronic PTSD, enduring personality change, significant distress, and aggravating features of the Defendant's conduct.
Special damages of £37,041.61 awarded.
Hotel accommodation, furniture, wasted holiday, treatment costs, and cost of removing images from the internet.
Total award of £97,041.61.
Combination of general and special damages.