[3] The claimant, Max Mosley, had been President of the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile since 1993 as well as being a trustee of its charitable arm the FIA Foundation.
Mosley claimed that sexual or sadomasochistic activities were inherently private in nature and that their portrayal was an invasion of privacy by reason of a pre-existing relationship of confidentiality between the participants.
[5] However, Justice David Eady also stated "The law now affords protection to information in respect of which there is a reasonable expectation of privacy, even in circumstances where there is no preexisting relationship giving rise of itself to an enforceable duty of confidence".
Justice Eady held that the first hurdle was the need to show a reasonable expectation of privacy, and if this could be overcome it was a matter of weighing up the competing Convention rights.
On the fourth day of the trial, it was revealed that News Group Newspapers Limited would place no further reliance on "Woman E", the prostitute who had recorded the incident and eventually received £20,000 (about $31,000) for doing so.
Mosley challenged the publication of details of his private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in respect to the headline, which read "F1 boss has sick Nazi orgy with five hookers".
Media lawyer Mark Stephens expressed such sentiments after the judgment and noted the hefty price that newspapers would pay for getting a "public interest" decision wrong.
[7] Newspapers criticised the judgment, The Sun describing it as "a dark day for British freedom" and a step towards "a dangerous European-style privacy law".
[13] Mosley stated that his intention to pursue further libel actions in France, Germany and Italy, where newspapers reprinted images of him engaging in sex acts.
In April 2008, immediately after publication of the story, Mosley's lawyers asked the News of the World to remove the video of him and the five prostitutes from its website.
[15] In July 2008, Justice Eady granted a permanent injunction, restraining News Group Newspapers from showing the video.