Review of Damages for Media Torts
There should be a review of damages generally available for breach of data protection, privacy, breach of confidence or any other media-related torts, to ensure proportionate compensation including for non-pecuniary loss (all referable to the duration, extent and gravity of the contravention).
- In Gulati v MGN Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1291, the Court of Appeal upheld substantial damages awards for phone hacking victims, with individual awards ranging from £72,500 to £260,250, significantly increasing the baseline for privacy damages (Gulati v MGN Ltd, Court of Appeal, December 2015).
- No published evidence that the formal review of damages generally available for media-related torts recommended by Lord Justice Leveson was conducted by the government or judiciary has been identified to March 2026.
How was this evidence gathered?
Response
Accepted in Part
Response
Accepted in PartCourt awards for privacy and data protection breaches have increased through case law since Leveson (notably Gulati v MGN 2015). However, the formal review of damages that Leveson recommended was not conducted. No specific government response was given to this recommendation. Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/david-cameron-statement-in-response-to-the-leveson-inquiry-report
Published Evidence
Published assessments of progress from inspectorates, select committees, official progress reports, and other sources. Source type badge indicates whether each assessment is independent or government self-reported.
Court awards for privacy and data protection breaches have increased significantly since Leveson. The Gulati v MGN case (2015) established that substantial damages are available for phone hacking. Prince Harry's settlement with News UK (January 2025) reportedly exceeded £10m. However there has been no formal review of damages as Leveson recommended.
View detailed findings
Damages have increased through case law but no formal review was conducted as specifically recommended.