A tried to restrain B from publishing material revealing that he had extra-marital affairs. CA refused the injunction, saying that there had to be a good justification for departing from freedom of speech under art 10. Art 8 could be impacted upon by art 10. However there was a significant difference between the confidentiality which attached to what was intended to be a permanent relationship and that which attached to the category of relationships which the claimant was involved with (i.e. lesser protection of the right to privacy under art 8 where the relationship is not a permanent one).
Lord Woolf MR: “If there is an intrusion in a situation where a person can reasonably expect his privacy to be respected then that intrusion will be capable of giving rise to liability in an action for breach of confidence unless the intrusion can be justified”. This is done by reference to the “public interest”.