Misuse of Private Information: Your Legal Rights in the UK

The tort of misuse of private information (MPI) is one of the most powerful tools in English law for protecting your privacy. Unlike defamation, an MPI claim does not require the information to be false — even entirely true facts can be protected if you had a reasonable expectation of privacy. This guide explains how MPI claims work, what you need to prove, and the remedies available.

What Is the Tort of Misuse of Private Information?

Misuse of private information is a cause of action that developed from the equitable doctrine of breach of confidence but is now recognised as a distinct tort. The landmark case of Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] established that individuals have a right of action when private information is published without consent, provided they had a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of that information.

The tort protects a wide range of information: medical records, sexual orientation, financial affairs, family relationships, correspondence, images taken in private settings, and any other information where the subject reasonably expected privacy.

The Two-Stage Test

Courts apply a two-stage test established in Campbell and refined in subsequent cases:

1. Stage 1: Reasonable expectation of privacy — Would a reasonable person in the claimant's position have a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of the information? Factors include the nature of the information, how it was obtained, the claimant's own conduct, and whether the information was already in the public domain.
2. Stage 2: Balancing exercise — If a reasonable expectation of privacy is established, the court must balance the claimant's Article 8 rights (privacy) against the defendant's Article 10 rights (freedom of expression). Neither right takes automatic precedence.

This balancing exercise is intensely fact-specific. The court considers the public interest in the information, the means by which it was obtained, the severity of the intrusion, and any contribution by the claimant to placing the information in the public domain.

Key Cases That Shaped the Law

_Campbell v MGN Ltd_ [2004] UKHL 22 — Naomi Campbell successfully sued the Daily Mirror for publishing details of her drug addiction treatment. The House of Lords held that while the fact of her addiction was not private (she had publicly denied drug use), the details of her treatment — including photographs taken covertly outside a Narcotics Anonymous meeting — were protected.

_PJS v News Group Newspapers_ [2016] UKSC 26 — The Supreme Court granted an injunction preventing publication of details of a celebrity's sexual conduct, even though the information was widely available online. The court held that the claimant's Article 8 rights outweighed the publisher's Article 10 rights, emphasising the "intrusive" quality of tabloid publication.

_Weller v Associated Newspapers_ [2015] EWCA Civ 1176 — The Court of Appeal upheld privacy claims brought on behalf of Paul Weller's children after paparazzi photographs were published. Children's privacy rights were given particular weight.

What Information Is Protected?

The categories of protected information are not closed, but common examples include:

• Medical information — diagnoses, treatment, mental health conditions, fertility treatment
• Sexual conduct — relationships, sexual orientation, intimate photographs
• Family life — parenting, children's schooling, custody arrangements
• Financial information — earnings, debts, tax affairs, business accounts
• Correspondence — private emails, text messages, WhatsApp conversations
• Location and movements — where covert surveillance is involved
• Images — photographs taken in private settings or published without consent

Remedies Available

Successful MPI claimants can obtain:

• Injunctions — court orders preventing publication (interim or final). In urgent cases, interim injunctions can be obtained within hours.
• Damages — compensation for distress, which can range from a few thousand pounds to six-figure sums depending on the severity of the intrusion
• Delivery up or destruction — orders requiring the defendant to hand over or destroy copies of the private information
• Account of profits — in some cases, the court may order the defendant to hand over any profits made from publishing the information

MPI vs Defamation: Key Differences

Understanding the difference is critical to choosing the right claim. See our detailed comparison in Privacy vs Defamation: Which Claim Is Right for You?

• Truth — Defamation requires the statement to be false; MPI protects true information
• Limitation — Defamation has a 1-year limitation period; MPI has 6 years
• Serious harm — Defamation requires serious harm to reputation; MPI requires only a reasonable expectation of privacy
• Legal aid — MPI claims can sometimes qualify for legal aid; defamation generally cannot

How to Bring an MPI Claim

The process typically involves:

1. Evidence gathering — securing and preserving evidence of the publication and the private nature of the information
2. Pre-action correspondence — a formal letter before action setting out the claim and demanding removal, an undertaking not to republish, and compensation
3. Urgent injunctions — if publication is imminent or ongoing, applying for an interim injunction to prevent further dissemination
4. Court proceedings — if the matter cannot be resolved through correspondence, issuing proceedings in the High Court (Media and Communications List)

Related Reading

Privacy Claims Hub | Privacy Injunctions | Breach of Confidence | Intimate Image Abuse