{"id":33626,"date":"2012-03-02T12:25:33","date_gmt":"2012-03-02T12:25:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/?p=33626"},"modified":"2012-03-02T12:25:47","modified_gmt":"2012-03-02T12:25:47","slug":"ryan-giggs-sun-damages","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/?p=33626","title":{"rendered":"UK: Ryan Giggs loses privacy damages claim against the Sun"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>A damages claim by Manchester United and Wales footballer Ryan Giggs against the Sun newspaper was <a title=\"Press Gazette - Sun wins High Court privacy battle with Ryan Giggs  \" href=\"http:\/\/www.pressgazette.co.uk\/story.asp?sectioncode=1&amp;storycode=48880&amp;c=1&amp;utm_source=twitterfeed&amp;utm_medium=twitter\" target=\"_blank\">thrown out<\/a>\u00a0by the High Court today. Giggs claimed that the tabloid had &#8220;misused&#8221; private information, and said he was entitled to claim damages for distress and breach of a right to privacy. Giggs\u00a0was granted an injunction in April 2011 after an article was published in the tabloid about an unnamed player&#8217;s alleged affair with model Imogen Thomas. The anonymity part of the injunction was <a title=\"Index on Censorship - UK: Ryan Giggs legally named as footballer behind Imogen Thomas &quot;affair&quot; injunction\" href=\"http:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/2012\/02\/ryan-giggs-injunction\/\" target=\"_blank\">lifted<\/a>\u00a0last month, despite the footballer already having been\u00a0widely identified on Twitter and named in the Commons by Lib Dem MP John Hemming in May 2011. News Group Newspapers, publisher of the Sun, argued at a hearing last month\u00a0that Giggs&#8217; damages claim was &#8220;dead in the water&#8221; and should be thrown out.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A damages claim by Manchester United and Wales footballer Ryan Giggs against the Sun newspaper was thrown out\u00a0by the High Court today. Giggs claimed that the tabloid had &#8220;misused&#8221; private information, and said he was entitled to claim damages for distress and breach of a right to privacy. Giggs\u00a0was granted an injunction in April 2011 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":57,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_mi_skip_tracking":false},"categories":[584,585,21],"tags":[7358,727,269,3429,631,7350],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33626"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/57"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=33626"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33626\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":33629,"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33626\/revisions\/33629"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=33626"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=33626"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indexoncensorship.org\/newsite02may\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=33626"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}