Tag Archives: Article 8

Libel/Defamation: cogent evidence required to defeat the qualified privilege defence

In the case of David v Hosany [2017] EWHC 2787 (QB), His Honour Judge Moloney QC considered a libel claim brought by the claimant, a Governor of the East London Foundation NHS Trust, in respect of three publications by the defendant, another Governor of the same Trust. These publications alleged that the claimant had intimidated and harassed the defendant, with two of the publications containing allegations of sexual harassment.

Read more

UEA in student data leak

The University of East Anglia (UEA) has admitted accidentally sending an email containing students’ highly sensitive personal information to 298 American Studies undergraduates.  The email in question attached a spreadsheet which contained “extenuating circumstances” justifying extensions for work and other academic concessions.  These are understood to include details of illnesses, bereavements and other personal matters.

Read more

Breach of privacy: Sir Cliff Richard settles claim against South Yorkshire Police

Following a high-profile, televised police raid on his Berkshire home in 2014, Sir Cliff Richard issued claims against the BBC and South Yorkshire Police for the misuse of his private information, infringement of his Article 8 ECHR right to a private life, and breach of the Data Protection Act 1998. In a recent hearing before Mr Justice Mann, Sir Cliff’s legal team stated that they had reached a settlement agreement with South Yorkshire Police and had agreed to stay proceedings against the BBC for one month in an attempt to reach a settlement.

Read more

Claimants obtain interim injunction preventing disclosure of extramarital affair

In TRK & BVP v ICM [2016] EWHC 2810 Mr Justice Warby granted an interim without notice injunction preventing a spurned lover from disclosing private information obtained from the alleged hacking of his former lover’s computer system.

Read more

Is a police investigation a private matter?

A recent decision by Nicol J in ERY v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2016] EWHC 2760 (QB) has found that a suspect in a police investigation has a reasonable expectation of privacy which is likely to trump the press’s right to freedom of expression.

Read more

Court of Appeal grants “celebrity threesome” privacy injunction and then discharges it

The Supreme Court is currently considering an appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal to discharge a non-disclosure injunction it granted itself earlier this year.  Until the Supreme Court has reached its decision the injunction in PJS v News Group Newspapers Ltd – the “celebrity threesome gagging order” – will remain in force.

Read more

Court of Appeal upholds damages in phone hacking claims

In Representative Claimants -v- Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1291 the Court of Appeal considered MGN’s appeal over privacy damages awarded against it for phone hacking.

Read more

Social Media defamation: Richardson v Facebook/Richardson v Google UK Ltd: Appeals dismissed as wrong defendants sued

In Richardson v Facebook [2015] EWHC 3154 (QB) Mr Justice Warby dismissed the claimant’s appeals in two separate but similar claims for defamation and breach of Article 8 ECHR.  One claim was brought against ‘Facebook’ and the other against Google UK Ltd.

Read more

High Court grants injunction after celebrity revenge porn threat

In JPH v XYZ [2015] EWHC 2871 Mr Justice Popplewell considered an emergency application for an  injunction to restrain the publication of intimate images.  The application was made after the Defendant threatened to publish photographs and videos of the Claimant (a successful actor) which were of a sexual nature and created whilst they were in a relationship.

Read more

A new era for privacy law: substantial damages likely to be commonplace

In Gulati & Ors and MGN Limited [2015] EWHC 1482 (Ch) Mr Justice Mann set out guidelines for assessing damages in privacy cases. As well as providing a helpful framework for determining damages, the judgment recognised that the level of damages awarded in earlier privacy cases have often been inadequate.

Read more

Contact us

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

Subject

Your Message