Sir Cliff Richard: BBC faces huge bill after dropping appeal against singer

Broadcaster says it will not seek permission to appeal decision that it breached singer's privacy

Media organisations have said they will urge the government to review the law on reporting on people under police investigation after the BBC announced it will not challenge a ruling on its legal battle with Sir Cliff Richard.

The 77-year-old singer was awarded £210,000 damages after a judge found the corporation’s coverage of a 2014 police raid on his home in Sunningdale, Berkshire, following a child sex assault allegation was a “very serious” invasion of his privacy.

Mr Justice Mann ruled in Sir Cliff’s favour in July, following a trial at the High Court in London, and the judge refused to grant the BBC permission to appeal.

The BBC said on Wednesday that it would not pursue a challenge at the Court of Appeal, despite saying it believes the judgment “represents a dramatic shift against press freedom”.

Instead the corporation will ask the government to consider a review of the law on naming people involved in police investigations.

A BBC spokesman said: “We accept the BBC and the rest of the media have a duty to be sensitive to the rights and position of those who are under investigation, and in some cases there will be little public interest in naming individuals.

“However, this ruling will limit the long-standing ability of journalists to report on police investigations – many cases of which have resulted in further complainants coming forward.

“It will make it harder to scrutinise the conduct of the police and it will undermine the principle of the public’s right to know.

“These concerns have been widely echoed by many other media organisations.

“There is a fundamental principle of press freedom at stake here and one upon which we believe Parliament, as our lawmakers, should decide.”

The Society of Editors and the News Media Association (NMA) said they will also be making representations to the government regarding the law on naming suspects in criminal investigations.

Society of Editors executive director Ian Murray said: “Parliament should now urgently consider whether such a step towards individual privacy against the protection of society’s overall liberties is acceptable.

“At risk is whether the balance between such issues which underpin individual rights and freedom of expression in our liberal democracy has now been altered to the detriment of us all.

“The society recognises that the sympathies of the public may well be strongly with Sir Cliff on this issue and in this particular case, but there are bigger issues at stake that, if unchallenged, will affect the liberties of all citizens.”

An NMA spokesman said: “The NMA will now seek urgent meetings with the government with the aim of ensuring that freedom of speech is not curtailed as a result of this judgment.

“Public confidence in the criminal justice system is underpinned by transparency at every stage of the process and anything which damages or limits this openness must be resisted.”

Michelle Stanistreet, general secretary of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ), said it was “disappointing” there would be no appeal.

She added: “This is an issue of broader concern to all who care about journalism and the ability of journalists to do their jobs well.

“The NUJ therefore welcomes the call for an urgent review and clarification of the law in light of this judgment.”

Mr Justice Mann previously said his judgment did not amount to a “blanket” restriction on journalists.

PA