Re-evaluating Campbell v MGN: Great Promise Unfulfilled – Paul Wragg

28 04 2015

gazetteIt is now over ten years since the landmark decision in Campbell v MGN Ltd ([2004] 2 AC 457) established the misuse of private information (“MOPI”) tort (any lingering doubt that it might not be a tort has been eradicated by the Court of Appeal decision in Vidal-Hall v Google Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 311).  Read the rest of this entry »





Party promises on Data Protection, FOI, Digital rights, Human Rights, Leveson and mass surveillance – Chris Pounder

21 04 2015

?????????At great risk to my mental health, I have extracted the relevant parts of the Party Manifestos.  Here they are without comment. URLs for each manifesto is at the end; address of my psychiatrist available on request. Read the rest of this entry »





Strasbourg, Grand Chamber Hearing: Can the right to freedom of expression justify the reporting about Monaco’s reigning monarch’s illegitimate child? – Dirk Voorhoof

20 04 2015

Prince AlbertOn 15 April 2015, the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR held a hearing in the case of Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France (App. no. 40454/07). The hearing is webcasted and can be viewed on the Court’s website, here. The case concerns the right of privacy and reputation of Monaco’s reigning monarch conflicting with the right to freedom of expression of the French magazine Paris-Match. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Almeida Leitão Bento Fernandes v. Portugal, No violation of Article 10 in ‘roman à clef’ case – Hugh Tomlinson QC

27 03 2015

Torre de MoncorvoIn the case of Almeida Leitão Bento Fernandes v. Portugal (Judgment of 12 March 2015)(available only in French), the First Section of the Court of Human Rights held that the a libel conviction and award of damages against an author whose novel was held to have libelled members of her husband’s family did not violate Article 10. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Haldimann v Switzerland, Court vindicates hidden camera’s role in watchdog journalism – Flutura Kusari and Nani Jansen

19 03 2015

ARCHITECTURE STOCKIn the case of Haldimann and Others v. Switzerland, published on 24 February 2015, the European Court of Human Rights (the “ECtHR”) backed the investigative methods of four Swiss journalists who had used hidden cameras to expose the malpractice of insurance brokers. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Haldimann v Switzerland, Conviction for secret filming breached Article 10 – Hugh Tomlinson QC

6 03 2015

kassensturz-emblemIn the case of Haldimann v Switzerland (Judgment of 24 February 2015, available only in French), the Second Section held that the conviction of four journalists for having recorded and broadcast an interview of a private insurance broker using a hidden camera was a breach of their Article 10 rights.  Although the case has been hailed as a “breakthrough for investigative journalism” it was, in reality, a fact sensitive decision from which no general conclusions can be drawn. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Guseva v Bulgaria, More freedom of information under Article 10 (with dissents) – Hugh Tomlinson QC

28 02 2015

Vidin-danube-photoIn the case of Guseva v Bulgaria (Judgment of 17 February 2015) a Chamber of the Court of Human Rights has again recognised an Article 10 right to access to information and found a violation where a public authority had failed to provide public interest information despite court orders.  There were, however, two dissenting judgments on this issue, including one from the UK judge. Read the rest of this entry »








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,215 other followers