Former royal butler Paul Burrell's privacy claim against disgraced PR guru Max Clifford reaches the High Court on Monday.
Clifford, currently serving an eight-year jail sentence for sex offences, has branded Mr Burrell's £50,000 action for breach of confidence and misuse of private information an ''affront to common sense".
Mr Burrell says he hired Clifford in 2001 to limit bad press coverage about him but, rather than stopping stories, the publicist passed on material to the now-defunct News Of The World.
Clifford's case is that their agreement was for him to sell information to a newspaper and the fax of a personal letter written to him by Mr Burrell was a "teaser".
He sent it to editor Rebekah Brooks in November 2002 - the day after Mr Burrell was acquitted at the Old Bailey of stealing items belonging to the late Diana, Princess of Wales.
Ms Brooks passed it on to royal correspondent Clive Goodman.
In an unsuccessful bid to have the case thrown out last year, Clifford's counsel Lorna Skinner described its content, about Mr Burrell's relationship with the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh, as mainly "tittle-tattle" which was not published and which Mr Burrell himself put in a book a year later.
Putting the real value of the case at less than £10,000, they said there was no evidence of any financial benefit for Clifford and that the litigation was a "costs-driven exercise".
But, Mr Burrell's counsel, William Bennett, claimed that Clifford was guilty of a "very, very serious" misuse of private information and confidence.
"It is all very well saying it has only been sent to one person, but when that was the editor of the News Of The World, the fax was being sent to the biggest-selling Sunday tabloid in the country, which adds to the grossness of the misuse of the private information."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article