AS WE teeter on the brink of war and serious cracks begin to appear between relations in Europe, it is understandable that Catherine Zeta Jones and husband Michael Douglas have become something of an easy target for taking their case for breach of privacy to court.

Against the hefty news dominating the headlines, the Hollywood golden couple provide a somewhat frivolous distraction.

They are pursuing a case against Hello! magazine claiming it breached their privacy by snatching photographs of their wedding when they had an exclusive £1 million deal with its rival OK!

They are claiming £500,000 damages.

Yes, the judge earlier this week was quite right when he told Douglas that their suffering was "trivial in comparison with the victims of accidents", but equally there is a principle -- no matter how insignificant to world stability -- at stake.

Forget ridiculous statements from the pair which claim their level of suffering and humiliation was almost too awful to bear. Forget too, the level of damages they are claiming.

Yes, they have put themselves up as easy targets, but there is nevertheless a tiny part of me which feels they do have a point.

Why should a magazine intrude into the couple's wedding? What right has it to sneak photographs at a family occasion? And yes, surely we can all understand the couple's indignation, and probably almost immediate reaction that they wanted to strike back.

But perhaps above all of this the most overriding question has to be who on earth advised them to go ahead with the case?

Surely it is that individual's advice which is now causing them far greater distress and humiliation in the public arena.