Case Study 5: A Woman v The Sun

• Several newspapers publish photographs of a woman jumping to her death from a London hotel
• The tragedy occured in view of onlookers and a passing photographer
• One newspaper publishes the photographs before the woman's identity had been made known
• One picture shows her standing on a ledge outside a window and one shows her during the fall
• Other newspapers publish similar images the following day after the woman has been identified
• A friend of the woman complains that the publication of the images was unnecessary and it was merely a matter of luck that she had been informed of her friends death before she saw the coverage
• She considers the images to be horrifying and distressing and the publication disgusting and voyeuristic
• The newspapers express their condolences to the family and friends of the dead woman, and express their regret for the distress that has been caused
• However, they argue that the decision to publish the photographs was considered carefully and is justified
• The event took place in public view and was witnessed by a crowd, the coverage was brief and factual and neither made light of the circumstances of the death or dwelt salaciously on unpleasant details

Would the terms of Clause 5 on intrusion into grief and shock apply in this instance?