Case Law, Strasbourg: Magyar Tartalomszolgáltatók Egyesülete and Index.hu Zrt v. Hungary, Intermediary liability (again) – Jonathan McCully

7 02 2016

mte-logo-nagyobbOn 2 February 2016, the Fourth Section of European Court of Human Rights handed down its judgment on intermediary liability in Magyar Tartalomszolgáltatók Egyesülete and Index.hu Zrt v. Hungary (Application No. 22947/13)([2016] ECHR 135). The judgment attempts to clarify the Grand Chamber’s findings in Delfi v. Estonia, whilst distinguishing that case on the basis that it involved “clearly unlawful speech” amounting to hate speech and incitement to violence. However, did the Court go far enough to protect free speech online? Read the rest of this entry »





No Employer Right to Snoop But What Of Employee Rights at Work? – Paul Wragg

5 02 2016

Privacy KeyboardThe decision in Barbulescu v Romania, in the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”), has attracted much press interest.  It has been widely reported as granting employers a right to snoop on their employee’s online life.  Let us ignore the actual facts for a moment (as most newspapers have done). Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Barbulescu v Romania, Surveillance of Internet Usage in the Workplace – Kate Richmond

17 01 2016

On 12 January 2016, in the case of Barbulescu v Romania ([2016] ECHR 61) the European Court of Human Rights, by 6 votes to 1, dismissed a Romanian national’s appeal against his employer’s decision to terminate his contract for using a professional Yahoo Messenger account to send personal messages to his fiancé and brother. Read the rest of this entry »





Bosses’ right to snoop on staff emails is an invasion of privacy and ignores the way we work – Christian Fuchs

15 01 2016

KeyboardSince Edward Snowden revealed the existence of internet surveillance programmes such as XKeyScore, Prism and Tempora, there have been many discussions of digital snooping and its implications for privacy, freedom and civil rights. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Cengiz and Others v. Turkey: a tentative victory for freedom of expression online – Marina van Riel

10 01 2016

You Tube BlockOn 1 December 2015, the European Court of Human Rights released a judgment in the case of Cengiz and Others v. Turkey. The main question put before the Court was whether the blocking of the popular video-sharing website YouTube constituted a violation of users’ Convention rights. Having first established the victim status of the applicants, the Court went on to find a violation of their right to receive and impart information under Article 10 ECHR. Read the rest of this entry »





A Christmas Wish for Privacy Law Developments in 2016 – Paul Wragg

18 12 2015

privacy1Imagine, set before us, the judicial toolkit in misuse of private information (MOPI) claims, as if it had physical properties.  We would see a fine set of golden scales, with one plate marked ‘privacy’ and the other marked ‘public interest’. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Zakharov v Russia, Grand Chamber re-affirms case law on state surveillance – Lorna Woods

16 12 2015

Lubyanka_BuildingOn 4 December 2015, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”) handed down judgment in the case of Roman Zakharov v Russia ([2015] ECHR 1065). Read the rest of this entry »








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,652 other followers