Court grants royal family injunction over topless Kate Middleton photos
Unless youve been hiding under a rock, you probably know that the Internet has gone absolutely bonkers over topless photos of Kate Middleton.
September 17, 2012 at 12:09 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Unless you've been hiding under a rock, you probably know that the Internet has gone absolutely bonkers over topless photos of Kate Middleton, Prince William's wife and the Duchess of Cambridge, sunbathing on vacation. French magazine Closer published the photos on Friday, and now must hand them over or face a hefty fine, a French court ruled today.
The royal family wasted no time in springing to action after the pictures were published, announcing Friday that they had already begun legal proceedings against the magazine. By Monday, the photos had spread, this time to Italy, where they were published by Chi magazine. Lawyers for the couple appeared in Paris court on Monday, seeking an injunction to stop any further dissemination of the images, which the court granted today.
The court ruled that Closer must turn over all copies of the photos, both physical and digital, to the duke and duchess within 24 hours, or else face a $12,000 daily fine. They are also forbidden from republishing any of the images. A spokesperson for the prince told French newspaper Le Monde that the couple did not seek damages at this hearing, but that they may in the future.
A spokeswoman for St. James Palace also told the Associated Press that the royal family planned to file a criminal complaint with French prosecutors against the photographer or photographers responsible for taking the pictures.
Interestingly, no British publications have printed the photos. Many media outlets are speculating that the country's once-raunchy tabloids have been chastened by the widely-publicized phone-hacking scandal faced by News Corp., the publisher of such tabloids as News of the World and The Sun. Another deterrent is Ireland's plan to introduce tougher privacy legislation in the wake of the Irish Daily Star's publication of the nude photos of the duchess.
Read more InsideCounsel stories about privacy:
Hugh Grant, Charlotte Church's priest sue News Corp.
FTC issues privacy guidance to app makers
Regulatory: The risks of neglecting privacy
California Senate passes social media privacy legislation
Amazon hires Nuala O'Connor as its first privacy counsel
Unless you've been hiding under a rock, you probably know that the Internet has gone absolutely bonkers over topless photos of Kate Middleton, Prince William's wife and the Duchess of Cambridge, sunbathing on vacation. French magazine Closer published the photos on Friday, and now must hand them over or face a hefty fine, a French court ruled today.
The royal family wasted no time in springing to action after the pictures were published, announcing Friday that they had already begun legal proceedings against the magazine. By Monday, the photos had spread, this time to Italy, where they were published by Chi magazine. Lawyers for the couple appeared in Paris court on Monday, seeking an injunction to stop any further dissemination of the images, which the court granted today.
The court ruled that Closer must turn over all copies of the photos, both physical and digital, to the duke and duchess within 24 hours, or else face a $12,000 daily fine. They are also forbidden from republishing any of the images. A spokesperson for the prince told French newspaper Le Monde that the couple did not seek damages at this hearing, but that they may in the future.
A spokeswoman for St. James Palace also told
Interestingly, no British publications have printed the photos. Many media outlets are speculating that the country's once-raunchy tabloids have been chastened by the widely-publicized phone-hacking scandal faced by
Read more InsideCounsel stories about privacy:
Hugh Grant, Charlotte Church's priest sue
FTC issues privacy guidance to app makers
Regulatory: The risks of neglecting privacy
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
5 minute read
In-House Lawyers Are Focused on Employment and Cybersecurity Disputes, But Looking Out for Conflict Over AI
Trending Stories
- 1No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 2Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 3Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 4Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
- 5Freshfields Hires Ex-SEC Corporate Finance Director in Silicon Valley
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
