Privacy Flashcards Preview

Tort Defamation > Privacy > Flashcards

Flashcards in Privacy Deck (39):
1

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

2

Wainwright v Home Office

strip and search of Cs

3

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

4

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

5

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)

6

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

7

It would be better left to partliament to create a free standing tort of privacy

Lord Hoffmann in Wainwright

8

Lord Hoffmann in Wainwright

It would be better left to partliament to create a free standing tort of privacy

9

breach of confidence action requirements (prior to recent developments)

1) confidential information
2) obligation of confidence
3) disclosure
originally employment towards 20th century broadening

10

Stephens v Avery

no requirement of professional relationship or contractual relationship (friends secrets)

11

no requirement of professional relationship or contractual relationship (friends secrets)

Stephens v Avery

12

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

13

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

14

Defence to confidency where information is already in public domain to some extent (Tom Jones being roudy on the plane)

Woodward v Hutchins

15

Woodward v Hutchins

Defence to confidency where information is already in public domain to some extent (Tom Jones being roudy on the plane)

16

Tort for Misuse of private information is distinct from breach of confidence

Vidal-Hall & ors v Google Inc

17

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

18

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

19

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

20

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

21

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

22

Weller

confirms that idea of expectation in Murray is an objective one

23

confirms that idea of expectation in Murray is an objective one

Weller

24

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

25

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

26

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

27

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!

28

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

29

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

30

Campbell

revelation of criminality will not always outweigh right to private life

31

revelation of criminality will not always outweigh right to private life

Campbell

32

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

33

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

34

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)

35

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

36

Remedies

Primary remedies are injunctions, sometimes modest damages will be awarded however no exemplary ones

37

Mosley (S&M case)

even if there has been a calculation of profit no exemplary damages

38

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.)

39

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