What becomes of Misuse of Private Information, the orphaned child? – Paul Wragg

26 05 2015

ChildHugh Tomlinson’s excellent post came as a welcome reassurance that the Misuse of Private Information (“MOPI”) tort should survive the proposed repeal of the Human Rights Act 1998 (“HRA”).  As he argues, MOPI is not dependent on its origins.  Yet MOPI is a child, with years of maturity still required, and one born of two parents (Articles 8 and 10 ECHR) with particular values, specifically that both are of equal status.  Once these parents are executed (for crimes they did not commit), MOPI can expect to be adopted by a very different set of parents, who are most unlikely to hold the same values.  Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Armellini v Austria, No violation of Article 10 in “football bribes” defamation case

12 05 2015

Casino_SW_BregenzIn the case of Armellini v Austria (Judgment of 16 April 2015) the First Section of the Court of Human Rights dismissed an Article 10 complaint by applicants who had been found guilty of defaming professional footballers by accusing them of taking bribes. The decision of the domestic court to convict the applicants of defamation was based on relevant and sufficient grounds and  properly balanced the Article 8 and Article 10 rights involved. Read the rest of this entry »





Will the tort of misuse of private information disappear if the Human Rights Act is repealed? – Hugh Tomlinson QC

11 05 2015

Human-Rights-Act1The Conservative Party Manifesto told voters that “The next Conservative Government will scrap the Human Rights Act, and introduce a British Bill of Rights”. It seems likely that this legislation, piloted by new Justice Secretary Michael Gove, will form part of the Queen’s Speech. What impact will this have on the developing law of privacy? Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Morice v France, “A great victory for the whole legal profession” – Inger Høedt-Rasmussen and Dirk Voorhoof

7 05 2015

Olivier-MoriceThe Grand Chamber in its judgment of 23 April 2015 in the case of Morice v. France has overruled an earlier finding of non-violation of the right to freedom of expression of a lawyer (Chamber judgment Fifth Section, 11 July 2013 – available only in French). Read the rest of this entry »





IPSO: The Inconvenient Truth, Part Four – Jonathan Coad

6 05 2015

Murdoch and IPSOSo what are the human rights and legal imperatives which make it so vital that there is effective regulation of the press via the fourth incarnation of self-regulation which has been served up by the behemoths of Fleet St. – who would (if they had their) be permitted to operate entirely free of any legal or regulatory restraint whatsoever? Read the rest of this entry »





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 »








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,255 other followers