OLG Frankfurt: Personal information about the private life of a professional footballer does not justify extensive press coverage

OLG Frankfurt: Limits of self-opening - freedom of the press versus personal rights

On 07.02.2025, the Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main ruled in a landmark judgment clarified how far the media may go in the area of conflict between freedom of the press and the protection of the privacy of prominent persons. At the heart of the ruling is the question of the extent to which a so-called Self-opening - i.e. the self-initiated disclosure of private information - entitles journalists to report on further intimate details of private life.

Facts at a glance

The subject matter of the proceedings concerns a well-known German professional football player who also plays for the national team, among others. The player himself had disclosed information about his private life to a limited extent, for example by posting photos with his daughter. However, it could not be inferred from this that comprehensive reporting on all private relationships - in particular his former intimate relationship - was lawful.

The articles in dispute from a publishing house went far beyond independent self-disclosure: they contained detailed descriptions of the relationship with the child's mother, her living situation, the separation process and information about the player's behavior towards a pregnant woman. These descriptions were primarily intended to satisfy the curiosity of the readers and were not adequately related to the public interest in information arising from his activities as an athlete.

Legal analysis: self-opening and balancing of interests

Narrowly interpreted concept of self-opening

The judgment of the OLG Frankfurt makes it clear that the Self-opening - i.e. the deliberate and voluntary disclosure of personal information - must be interpreted narrowly, especially when it comes to intimate relationships. Only those who have expressly and comprehensively disclosed their private affairs can legitimize the reporting of all private details. In the present case, however, it was found that simply disclosing the fact of being a father does not automatically justify the publication of further private information about previous relationships.

Balancing freedom of the press and personal rights

The court found that, although there was a large public Interest in information in the person of a national player - due to his role model function, his top-earning role and his activity in the national team - but this interest does not, however, generally prohibit interference in the personal life of the player. Personal rights justified. The freedom of the press and the right to freedom of expression must always be protected in the context of a Weighing of interests against the protection of privacy.

Protection of privacy:
The player had clearly signaled that he had always kept his past relationship private. The media portrayal, which went far beyond the information he himself disclosed, therefore violated his right to privacy.
Inadmissible extension of self-revelation:
Even if the player revealed private details in individual cases - for example the existence of a daughter - this does not mean that the media is allowed to intrude into all other private areas of life on the basis of this self-disclosure. The court emphasized: "Especially with regard to intimate relationships of the person concerned, the scope of self-disclosure is to be drawn rather narrowly."

Special aspects of the judgment

Another critical point was the reporting of the player's weekly and annual earnings. Although it is often claimed that the salaries of prominent athletes are common knowledge, the publisher was unable to sufficiently demonstrate that this also applied without restriction to the player in question. Thus, the invasion of privacy remained without sufficient justification.

Relevance for press law and media law

The judgment of the OLG Frankfurt sets an important precedent in the Press law and Media law. It emphasizes that:

Journalistic due diligence:
When reporting, media representatives must always weigh up whether the public interest in information really exists or whether the privacy of the person concerned is being unlawfully violated.
Limited self-revelation:
A selective self-disclosure is not sufficient to justify a comprehensive medial processing of private areas of life. Intimate details that serve solely to satisfy curiosity are not proportionate to the public interest.
Weighing up interests as the central benchmark:
The decision makes it clear that when weighing up interests, the protection of personal rights - even in the case of celebrities - takes precedence when it comes to purely private aspects of life.

Practical consequences for journalists and media representatives

For the media and journalists, this ruling means that particularly careful consideration is required when reporting on the private lives of celebrities. The following points should be taken into account:

Examination of self-revelation:
It is necessary to evaluate the extent to which self-disclosure has actually taken place and whether this covers media reporting on all private details.
Clear separation of public and private interest:
Only information that is directly related to the public role of the person concerned may be reported without restriction.
Documentation of the balancing of interests:
In case of doubt, editorial offices should carefully document the balance between the public interest in information and the right to privacy in order to be able to understand the court's decision in the event of a dispute.

Conclusion

The ruling by the Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main marks a significant milestone in press law. It underlines that the Self-opening is to be interpreted very narrowly with regard to intimate private relationships and that the Freedom of the press always in the context of a comprehensive Weighing of interests is to be considered. Even if celebrities are generally subject to a greater public interest in information, this must not be at the expense of the protection of their privacy.

marken medien meyen helps!

Do you have any questions about this groundbreaking judgment or do you need legal advice in the area of Press law, Media law or Personal rights?
As a specialist lawyer for intellectual property law and owner of the law firm brands media meyen I am at your side with my sound expertise. Contact us today for a non-binding consultation and secure your rights - we support you competently and purposefully!