Privacy Case Analysis Flashcards
What are the Privacy + Intrusion into Seclusion cases?
- Bradley v Wingnut Films Ltd
- Hosking v Runting
- Andrews v TVNZ
Privacy ^ - C v Holland
- Fasenkloet v Jenkin
- Henderson v Walker
Intrusion into seclusion ^
What is the privacy tort
A breach in privacy of something
‘Planks’ of publication privacy?
- Was there publication
- Are the facts in the publication private
- Is this publication highly offensive to a reasonable person
- Is there any defence of public concern?
What is public concern and what is not public concern?
Public concern = breaking law, politics, overall things that are going to impact the public
Non-public concern = celebrity scandal, gossip.
Private facts are…
Facts that are known by just you or select people, not the whole public.
If they are doing something illegal…
There is no expectation of privacy
Elements of intrusion into seclusion?
- An intentional and unauthorised intrusion
- Into seclusion
- Involving infringement of a reasonable expectation of privacy
- That is highly offensive to the reasonable person
An intentional act is things like…
Videoing, peeping, phone hacking
Key points in Bradley v Wingnut Films Ltd
Tomstone is not private
Not offensive - barely in it and not associated with anything bad
Key ponts in Hosking v Runting
If you are a public figure you have a reduced expectation of privacy
Key points of Andrews v TVNZ
Expectation of no ADDITIONAL publication
Not painted in a bad light and blurred faces - not offensive
Key points of C v Holland
Clearly all met
Key points of Fasenkloet v Jenkin?
Driveway is not very private, unlike inside home, also no evidence of any private activites done in driveway - no expectation of privacy or offensiveness
Key points of Henderson v Walker
Extended Hosking Tort - publication does not need to be widespread.
Bad blood plays into motive
