ions on Jock Campbell. If there is any evidence suggesting that my source and Mr. Campbell have history of falling out, this might allude that my source did not honestly think these comments but just wanted to seek revenge and damage the coffee shop’s manager reputation.

On the other hand, publishing an unauthorised photograph of Mr. Campbell would result in breach of confidence. In 2003, Hello! magazine published photographs of film stars Catherine Zeta-Jones and Michael Douglas’ wedding. The couple had sold the rights of all the pictures to OK! magazine and banned all their guest from taking photos at the wedding. The Court of Appeal argued that the photographer disclosed pictures of a private event and ‘the intrusion [by the photographer] into the private domain was itself objectionable’. Hello! defended themselves by saying that the pictures were not confidential material since the couple sold them to OK! But the court claimed that celebrities right to sell their pictures, it is comparable to a trade secret like the formula of a drink such as Coca-Cola. Moreover, the court stated that Hello! knew that a publisher had paid for exclusive rights of the pictures and unauthorised use of that information could have resulted in breach of confidence. Hello! had eventually to pay over £1 million.

In Campbell v MGN (2004), the Mirror was sued by model, Naomi Campbell for releasing pictures of her attending the Narcotics Anonymous. Lord Hope talked about breach of confidence when he said: “The underlying question in all cases where it is alleged that there has been a breach of the duty of confidence is whether the information that was disclosed was private and not public…If the information is obviously private, the situation will be one where the person to whom it relates can reasonably expect his privacy to be respected.”

If for any reason, a journalist decides to publish a photograph of Mr. Campbell, he would need to be able to prove that it was published with the pursuer’s consent, or was already in public domain or that there is a public interest reason in publishing it.

Another source, claims that Mr. Campbell was apparently known to be very friendly with a convicted sex offender. As written above, this claim needs to be verified by the journalist before publishing it. Assuming that this is true, a journalist might publish it as a matter of public interest. In the Editor’s Code of Practice of IPSO, public interest includes “raising or contributing to a matter of public debate, including serious cases of impropriety, unethical conduct or incompetence concerning the