Privacy Flashcards
Privacy is not explicitly recognised as a tort in its own right
shown Wainwright v Home Office, Kaye v Robertson, more recently confirmed in Browne
Wainwright v Home Office
strip and search of Cs
Kaye v Robertson
actor was interviewed and taken photos off in hospital after suffering bad injuries in a car accident;
it seemed right to protect his privacy in these circumstances but court had to apply a scatter gun approach because privacy is not explicitly recognised as a tort and none of them was an effective way of protecting his right to be left alone
actor was interviewed and taken photos off in hospital after suffering bad injuries in a car accident;
it seemed right to protect his privacy in these circumstances but court had to apply a scatter gun approach because privacy is not explicitly recognised as a tort and none of them was an effective way of protecting his right to be left alone
Kaye v Robertson
Von Hannover v Germany
Due to s6 of the HRA which requires public authorities to positively protect convention rights the judges are required to develop the common law in a way that is consistent with the ECHR. This means judges are obliged to protect unjustifiable invasions of a persons privacy, which is protected under Art. 8 (limits o be drawn with Art. 10)
Due to s6 of the HRA which requires public authorities to positively protect convention rights the judges are required to develop the common law in a way that is consistent with the ECHR. This means judges are obliged to protect unjustifiable invasions of a persons privacy, which is protected under Art. 8 (limits o be drawn with Art. 10)
Von Hannover v Germany
It would be better left to partliament to create a free standing tort of privacy
Lord Hoffmann in Wainwright
Lord Hoffmann in Wainwright
It would be better left to partliament to create a free standing tort of privacy
breach of confidence action requirements (prior to recent developments)
1) confidential information
2) obligation of confidence
3) disclosure
originally employment towards 20th century broadening
Stephens v Avery
no requirement of professional relationship or contractual relationship (friends secrets)
no requirement of professional relationship or contractual relationship (friends secrets)
Stephens v Avery
Spycatcher
Lord Goff in this case suggest that an obligation could arise due to the nature of the information, example: diary page blowing out -> must be really obvious though
Lord Goff in this case suggest that an obligation could arise due to the nature of the information, example: diary page blowing out -> must be really obvious though
Spycatcher
Defence to confidency where information is already in public domain to some extent (Tom Jones being roudy on the plane)
Woodward v Hutchins
Woodward v Hutchins
Defence to confidency where information is already in public domain to some extent (Tom Jones being roudy on the plane)
Tort for Misuse of private information is distinct from breach of confidence
Vidal-Hall & ors v Google Inc
Vidal-Hall & ors v Google Inc
Tort for Misuse of private information is distinct from breach of confidence
there is no need to refer back to breach of confidence principles in assessing a PQ
Campbell v MGN
Two step test (Lord Nicholls)
1) had the C reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to the information that has been disclosed
2) Are there countervailing factors which require that Ds right to freedom of expression should prevail
Two step test (Lord Nicholls)
1) had the C reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to the information that has been disclosed
2) Are there countervailing factors which require that Ds right to freedom of expression should prevail
Campbell v MGN
Murray
JK ROWLING BABY
Objective reasonable person test:
What would a reasonable person in position of D be entitled to expect in terms of protection of his/her privacy
JK ROWLING BABY
Objective reasonable person test:
What would a reasonable person in position of D be entitled to expect in terms of protection of his/her privacy
Murray
Weller
confirms that idea of expectation in Murray is an objective one
confirms that idea of expectation in Murray is an objective one
Weller
McKennit
Misuse of private information and breach of confidence are separate;
dicta suggests that misuse of private information claim could be based on false information
Private informarion are def:
intimate details, and helath information
intimate conversations which wouldnot be held in public
Misuse of private information and breach of confidence are separate;
dicta suggests that misuse of private information claim could be based on false information
Private informarion are def:
intimate details, and helath information
intimate conversations which wouldnot be held in public
McKennit
Douglas v Hello!
Public figures are entitled to private lige, although where they have courted publicity they might have to accept greater scrutiny by the media
Public figures are entitled to private lige, although where they have courted publicity they might have to accept greater scrutiny by the media
Douglas v Hello!
A v B plc
Lord Wolff suggests that publications can be in the public interest by the mere value of a free and thriving press, or in other words profitable newspaper sales.
Essentially this would mean that you could justify any publication as long as it is profitable-> unlikely to be upheld
Lord Wolff suggests that publications can be in the public interest by the mere value of a free and thriving press, or in other words profitable newspaper sales.
Essentially this would mean that you could justify any publication as long as it is profitable-> unlikely to be upheld
A v B plc
Campbell
revelation of criminality will not always outweigh right to private life
revelation of criminality will not always outweigh right to private life
Campbell
setting the record straight might be a relevant factor
although Lady Hale in Campbell is not convinced of this and this was not the only factor here
Woodward v Hutchins
Woodward v Hutchins
setting the record straight might be a relevant factor
although Lady Hale in Campbell is not convinced of this and this was not the only factor here
Ferdinand v MGN
it is relevant where the Claimant is a leading figure or role model and the publication sheds light on hypocrisy (kind of setting the record straight)
it is relevant where the Claimant is a leading figure or role model and the publication sheds light on hypocrisy (kind of setting the record straight)
Ferdinand v MGN
Remedies
Primary remedies are injunctions, sometimes modest damages will be awarded however no exemplary ones
Mosley (S&M case)
even if there has been a calculation of profit no exemplary damages
Gulati
Should be compared to personal injury non-pecuniary damages (damages which are not readily quantified or valued in money, such as proposed compensation for pain and suffering.)
Categories
Categories are specific situations and types of harm which are guided by special rules
Ask yourself: Does the situation fall under one of the special categories? If not Back to general test from Caparo
