£100k Damages in Bathroom Images Revenge Porn Case

A ground breaking claim for civil damages in a revenge porn case has concluded with a judge awarding the claimant nearly £100k, comprising damages of £60,000, plus a further £37,000 for her financial losses. The defendant in this case had already been convicted of sexual offences by the criminal court but civil proceedings were then also brought against him..

The case arose after the woman's ex took intimate videos of her whilst she naked, without her knowledge or consent. The defendant Stuart Gaunt had hidden a camera in the bathroom of the property they shared together. He then published those images on a pornographic site (for which he was probably paid), along with a photograph of the claimant's face, so there was no doubt that the images were of her. 

The effect of Gaunt's actions were devastating for the claimant and she suffered from post traumatic stress disorder and changes to her personality. The judge accepted that the impact upon the claimant was as serious as if she had suffered sexual assault. 

The judge took into consideration the likelihood that the intimate images had been shared more widely than just the pornographic site where they were published by Gaunt and the fact that he had probably made money from them, when deciding the level of damages.

 The judge was highly critical of Gaunt's refusal to take part in the civil proceedings and awarded higher damages as a result. The judge noted that Gaunt's refusal meant that he "deprived the claimant of the opportunity to obtain information about the extent of publication, which remains a preoccupation for her and a barrier to her recovery".

The judge made interesting comments about how these types of case are referred to and was critical of the term "revenge porn". The judge said the use of the word "revenge" implied that the claimant had done something wrong, which led to the defendant's actions. The judge felt that this was wrong and suggested that cases of this type should refer to "image based abuse" rather than revenge porn, as this better reflected the reality of the circumstances of the case. 

Revenge porn, or image based abuse has been a criminal offence since 2015. This case demonstrates that substantial damages can also be awarded in such cases. Judith Thompson, an expert in reputation management matters including revenge pornography says: "There was no sexual activity filmed by Gaunt, which suggests that if material of an overtly sexual nature had been filmed and published, the damages awarded to the claimant could have been even higher. This is heartening for claimants who have hitherto had very little indication of the level of damages that might be achieved if they sue a defendant for breaching their privacy via revenge porn activities."

If an aggrieved ex partner shares intimate pictures or videos online, or distributes them in another way, they could be sued for substantial damages, as well as being convicted of a criminal offence. If you are a victim of revenge porn or image based abuse you should seek legal advice today. 

If someone has shared private images of you, contact us today to find out how we can help.