BBC could appeal the judgment, which they said could affect press freedom in reporting police investigations

The Daily Mail reports today :

'Sir Cliff Richard tearfully told of his relief today after he won his landmark privacy case against the BBC over its coverage of a police raid on his home.

Sir Cliff took legal action against the BBC over the live broadcast of a South Yorkshire Police raid on his home in Sunningdale, Berkshire, in August 2014, following a child sex assault allegation. The star was never arrested or charged and his case was discontinued by the Crown Prosecution Service in June 2016.

The veteran popstar - who was previously given £400,000 by the police in an out-of-court settlement - was today awarded another £210,000 in damages, most of which will be paid by the BBC.

High Court judge Mr Justice Mann ruled today that the BBC had infringed the star's privacy rights in a 'serious and sensationalist way' and increased the damages because the corporation boasted about it's 'scoop of the year' at an awards event.

An overwhelmed Sir Cliff, 77, hugged friends after the judge gave his decision and told reporters he was 'choked up', adding: 'I can't believe it. It's wonderful news.'

A number of Sir Cliff's fans gathered outside the High Court during the ruling and sung his hit 'Congratulations' song as he left.

The BBC - whose bill for the case is expected to run into seven figures - said it is considering an appeal against the judgment. Who pays the legal costs of the case will be decided at a hearing next week.

The corporation's Director of News Fran Unsworth branded the ruling a 'dramatic shift against press freedom' adding: 'It means police investigations, and searches of people's homes, could go unreported and unscrutinised.'

Mr Justice Mann ruled today: 'I find that Sir Cliff had privacy rights in respect of the police investigation and that the BBC infringed those rights without a legal justification.

'It did so in a serious way and also in a somewhat sensationalist way. I have rejected the BBC's case that it was justified in reporting as it did under its rights to freedom of expression and freedom of the press.'

The judge awarded Sir Cliff £210,000 damages for the 'general effect' on his life and said he is entitled to recover further sums for the financial impact on the star, which will be decided at a later date.

The judge said £20,000 of the damages were due to the BBC aggravating the case by nominating the story for a 'Scoop of the Year' award at the Royal Television Society Awards.

It was previously claimed Sir Cliff was seeking more than £600,000 from the BBC - £250,000 in compensation, £278,000 legal costs and £108,000 for PR. He has previously claimed he spent £3.4million clearing his name.

The BBC will also have its own huge legal bill for the long-running case, meaning the cost to the corporation is expected to top £1million.

The £210,000 damages award is thought to be one of the highest ever awards in a UK privacy case.'