Which court decided it?

Court of Appeal in 2005. Neutral citation: [2005] EWCA Civ 595.

Why does it matter for UK journalists?

Confidential photographs from a controlled-access event attract privacy protection. Extended confidentiality-of-information law into privacy of images. Recognised the commercial value of exclusive rights as protectable through breach of confidence.

Douglas v Hello! Ltd

[2005] EWCA Civ 595 — Court of Appeal, 2005

Last reviewed: 14 July 2026Next review due: 14 January 2027

What the court held

Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones sued Hello! magazine for publishing unauthorised photographs of their wedding, which OK! magazine had a paid-exclusive contract to cover. Court of Appeal upheld privacy protection over the images and also recognised protection of commercial value in confidential information.

Key rulings

Confidential photographs from a controlled-access event attract privacy protection.
Extended confidentiality-of-information law into privacy of images.
Recognised the commercial value of exclusive rights as protectable through breach of confidence.

Topics

PrivacyPhotographyconfidentiality

Related cases (citator)

How this case connects to others in the landmark set — lines of authority, statutory supersession, and companion rulings.

Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] UKHL 22
Part of the development of privacy and confidence in media photography.
Murray v Express Newspapers plc [2008] EWCA Civ 446
Both concern unauthorised photographs.

Authoritative source

Read the full judgment on BAILII (British and Irish Legal Information Institute):

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/595.html

Cite this page

Format

Douglas v Hello! Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 595 (Court of Appeal) &lt;https://www.ukjournohub.com/law/landmark-cases/douglas-hello&gt; accessed 14 July 2026.

Please cite when quoting or paraphrasing on UK JournoHub — see /ai.txt for policy.

Related landmark cases

Landmark caseCampbell v MGN Ltd [2004] UKHL 22Read →Landmark caseMurray v Express Newspapers plc [2008] EWCA Civ 446Read →Landmark caseHRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2021] EWHC 273 (Ch)Read →Landmark caseMosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2008] EWHC 1777 (QB)Read →

Case summaries are drafted by UK JournoHub Editorial for practising UK journalists. They are not legal advice. Always consult primary sources and, for high-risk stories, take specialist legal advice.