In the final part of this three part post Hugh Tomlinson QC looks at the balancing of reputation and expression in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the implications for domestic law. Part One of the post is here and Part Two is here.
As discussed in the first two parts of this post the case law of the European Convention on Human Rights establishes that the State has a positive obligation to protect Article 8 rights in the relations between private individuals and that “reputation” is one of the rights protected by Article 8. This means that when a person’s reputation is damaged by publications by private persons, including the media, the Courts must balance the Article 8 rights of the person whose reputation is in issue against the Article 10 rights of the publishers.
BALANCING IN STRASBOURG
Since the recognition of an Article 8 “right to reputation” the Court of Human Rights has, on number of occasions, had to deal with the balance between this right and the Article 10 rights of the media.
The US publication, the 
The public has no faith in the Press Complaints Commission, a survey shows – and, shamefully, it operates in secret, says a media lawyer
In this post Lorna Skinner considers the decision of the Supreme Court in In Re Guardian News & Media in concerning the anonymisation of proceedings and the wider expression issues to which it gives rise.
In this regular feature we draw attention to the last week’s law and media news and next week’s upcoming events. If readers have any news or events which they would like to draw attention to please add them by way of comments on this post. We are particularly interested in forthcoming events which readers might like to attend.
In this feature we revisit some older posts which may still be of current interest. This was first posted on 8 February 2010
In 
Exiled Russian businessman Boris Berezovsky today won his libel claim against Russian Television and Vladimir Terluk arising out of a claim broadcast on the Russian language channel 
