[2023] EWHC 419 (KB)
The following summary is taken from the August 2023 ACAL Newsletter and is published here with the kind permission of Jonathan Bridge of Farleys solicitors
On 17 January 2023 the case of FGX v Stuart Gaunt came before the Honourable Mrs Justice Thornton DBE sitting in the High Court of Justice Kings Bench Division.
The Claimant was represented by Justin Levinson of Counsel instructed by Jonathan Bridge of Farleys Solicitors.
The case is understood to be the first claim for damages for image based abuse (commonly referred to as “revenge porn”) to come before the Courts.
FGX v Gaunt [2023] EWHC 419 (KB) (27 February 2023) (bailii.org)
Background
The Claimant was in a relationship with the Defendant and living in his home. She discovered a camera concealed in the bathroom of his house and following further investigation realised that he had filmed her whilst naked in the bathroom, showering and whilst sleeping topless. She further discovered that he had shared these images on a pornographic website alongside a photograph of her face without her knowledge or consent.
The Claimant fled their shared home and reported the matter to the Police. The Defendant was convicted in the criminal courts of voyeurism and related sexual offences, receiving a 2 year suspended sentence.
The Claimant instructed Farleys Solicitors to explore a civil claim against the Defendant.
Details of Claim
This was an interesting claim in which various aspects of the law were considered.
The Court was asked to assess quantum on the basis of separate and distinct torts – the intentional infliction of injury and the misuse of private information.
The Court considered a range of very different cases. Reference was made to the ABC and WH v Willock case [2015] EWHC 2687 which involved an infant Claimant being encouraged to send texts of a sexual content and indecent images of herself to her abuser. The Court also considered the case of Reid v Price [2020] EWHC 594 (QB) which involved celebrities Alex Reid and Katie Price. This case also reached trial but differed from the FGX case in that the images had not been shared widely on the internet and assessment of damages was a theoretical exercise in the absence of any medical evidence and on the basis that the Defendant was bankrupt and that recovery of damages was unlikely.
The Court considered the “phone hacking” cases particularly MGN Limited v Representative Claimants [2015] EWCA Civ 1291 and its impact on the ‘misuse of private information’ tort.
Damages in FGX
The Claimant had understandably suffered psychiatric injury as a result of naked images being posted on the internet without her consent. Medical evidence was obtained which confirmed a permanent psychiatric injury. Dr Chahl (consultant psychiatrist) was instructed and suggested the existence of a Mixed Anxiety and Depressive Disorder together with Chronic Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Treatment was recommended but the Claimant’s position was likely to be permanent with future relapses predicted.
There were other important aspects to the claim in addition to the General Damages award. The Claimant’s reaction to finding out about her partner’s actions had been to flee the shared home immediately. As a result she left valuable items of furniture that were not returned. Holidays that had been booked for the couple to share together could not be kept. Evidence was obtained from an expert as to the cost of attempting to remove images from the internet.
The Court considered the various heads of claim and made an overall award of £97,041.61. This included £60,000 for Pain, Suffering and Loss of Amenity alongside the cost of hotel accommodation whilst the Claimant found somewhere else to live, the left behind items of furniture and the aborted holiday. In particular the Court awarded £21,600 as the estimated costs of removing a significant amount of content from the internet.
Significance of Case
The significance of the case is that it is the first time a claim for damages following imaged based abuse on the internet has appeared before the Courts. The award reflects the seriousness the Courts will attach to these cases. The General Damages award was not dissimilar to the types of award we would expect to achieve for a rape victim. The impact on GFX has been similar. She has a lifelong psychiatric injury that will impact on her relationships and will need ongoing treatment.
Case details
- Court – England and Wales Kings Bench Division
- Judge – Mrs Justice Thornton DBE
- Date of Judgment – 27 February 2023
- Solicitor to Claimant – Jonathan Bridge of Farleys LLP
- Counsel to Claimant – Justin Levinson of One Crown Office Row
By Jonathan Bridge, Partner, Farleys Solicitors
To read a copy of the final judgment on the baillii site follow this link –