Douglas and Zeta Jones had their day in court last month

As the two sides summed up their cases, counsel for Hello! said the main business of OK!'s owner, Northern and Shell, was pornography.

But OK!'s representative hit back, calling the accusation "a smear".

The Douglases and OK! are suing Hello! for printing paparazzi photographs of their 2000 wedding in New York.

The couple claim their privacy was invaded, while OK! - which had signed a deal with the couple to cover the wedding - says its rival deliberately set out to damage its business.

The Douglases wanted control of publicity and not privacy - they are two different subjects James Price Hello!'s QC

James Price, QC, representing Hello!, told Mr Justice Lindsay in his closing speech: "Northern and Shell's business, to put it bluntly, is pornography."

He said the Douglases could not have known what Northern and Shell was involved in when they signed the �1m deal for exclusive coverage of the wedding.

Michael Tugendhat QC, representing the Douglases and Northern and Shell, rose to his feet to interrupt.

"I don't understand what he is saying. It is obviously a smear," he said.

Mr Price replied: "Yes, but it is true."

Northern and Shell, headed by media tycoon Richard Desmond, publishes a range of adult magazines as well as the Daily Express and Daily Star newspapers.

'Lascivious'

Mr Price added that Michael Douglas's suggestion that the Hello! pictures were lascivious, and the claimed distress of his wife, had to be viewed against the way the authorised pictures were presented to the public by Northern and Shell.

He said: "In the Danish publication SE Og Hor, an authorised wedding photograph appears on the front cover in close proximity to a picture of a bare-breasted woman."

Hello!'s barrister added the magazine contained further images of "a lascivious nature" on 16 inside pages, including what he called a "particularly hard-core image".

Mr Price said the Douglases had launched the "enormous" action against Hello! claiming it had breached their privacy and confidence.

"Confidence and privacy is essentially what this trial is all about," he said.

"But what has been proved is that the Douglases wanted control of publicity and not privacy.

"Control of publicity and privacy are two different subjects."

Following the defence's summing up, which comes on Day 18 of the case, it will be the turn of lawyers acting for the Douglases to restate their case.

The hearing was later adjourned until Tuesday.

Closing arguments are likely to continue into next week.