Yes, that's absolutely right. For the sake of completeness, if we look at what the Commission says other the page:
"The Commission has recently made clear that newspapers should not reveal the fact of someone's pregnancy before the 12 week scan without consent and when the information is not known to any significant degree. The newspaper's defence in this case was that it had merely reported rumours that the complaint was pregnant because of a change in her behaviour, but the newspaper had provided no evidence of any rumours and had not denied that it had known for a fact that she was pregnant when it published the piece. In these circumstances, it seemed to the Commission that the newspaper had simply tried to circumvent the privacy provisions of the code by representing the story as speculation. This was not acceptable within the spirit of the code. The complaint was unheld."
So we'll see, sir, that the PCC took a view as to what the newspaper was in fact saying.