The French court of appeal has overturned the defamation convictions of Amandine Roy and Natacha Rey, who falsely claimed in a 2021 YouTube video that First Lady Brigitte Macron was born male, under the name of her brother.

The court ruled the women acted in good faith, believing their claims served the public interest, despite the accusations being baseless. The lower court had ordered the defendants to pay €8,000 to Macron and €5,000 to her brother, however the appellate decision reversed the ruling. Macron’s legal team have indicated that they plan to appeal the decision. The Telegraph, Le Monde, France24, The Economic Times and International Business Times.

In a judgment handed down on 11 July 2024 in the case of Baroness Lawrence & Ors v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2025] EWHC 1716 (KB) Nicklin J ordered Prince Harry and six other claimants suing Associated Newspapers over alleged unlawful newsgathering to disclose any payments or inducements made to private investigators or witnesses. The Judge found that the claimants had failed to adequately disclose documents held by their research team, including those potentially undermining their claims. The case, involving accusations of phone tapping, hacking, and surveillance between 1993 and 2018, is set to go to trial in January 2026. The Telegraph, The Times, Press Gazette and The Sun covered the decision.

Internet and Social Media

The government has signed a deal with Google to “upskill” up to 100,000 civil servants in the latest tech and AI by 2030, aiming to make 1 in 10 public officials “tech experts.” Announced at the Google Cloud Summit in London, the agreement, which will come at no cost to the government, seeks to modernise public services and end reliance on outdated systems. However, critics have warned that it risks creating a new dependency on US tech giants and raises concerns over data security, especially under volatile political conditions in the US. The Guardian and The Register covered the development. Read the government’s press release here.

Data privacy and data protection

The ICO is seeking input on a proposed enforcement approach that could enable privacy-preserving alternatives to the current tech advertising model. The consultation focuses on how regulation 6 of the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR) is applied, exploring whether publishers could serve non-consensual ads in low-risk scenarios. The deadline to respond is Friday 29 August 2025.

The ICO has welcomed the decision of the First-Tier tribunal in the appeal of TikTok Inc & Anor v Information Commissioner [2025] UKFTT 798 (GRC). As covered in last week’s round-up, the tribunal confirmed that the commissioner had the jurisdiction to issue a money penalty notice to Tiktok in 2023. 5RB also has a summary of the judgement.

The IAPP has an article on the limits of legal and policy frameworks that apply to wearable health trackers, given the high levels of data collection and difficulties with anonymisation.

Newspaper Journalism and regulation

The Daily Mail was reprimanded by the press regulator IPSO for publishing a false claim that “one in 12 living in London is an illegal migrant.” The Mail based its article on an earlier, uncorrected Telegraph report, which misinterpreted data from a Thames Water study. IPSO ruled that, while the Mail was entitled to report on another outlet’s story, it failed to take sufficient care in verifying the accuracy of the figures and correcting a significant inaccuracy on a socially and politically sensitive issue. The Mail published corrections. The Press Gazette covered IPSO’s ruling.

Hacked Off has a blog post arguing that the coverage of Rachel Reeves tears during PMQs highlighted the sexist double standards.

The Brett Wilson Media Law Blog features an article highlighting the risks commentators face when selectively quoting interviews, as this can potentially lead to defamation claims where the defence of honest opinion may not be available.

Events

Registration is now open for the annual Data Protection Practitioners’ Conference hosted by the Information Commissioner’s Office on Tuesday 14 October 2025. It is open to professionals in any sector and will cover current data protection issues. Register here.

IPSO

Statements in open court and apologies

We are not aware of any apologies or statements in open court from the last week.

New Issued cases

There were no claims filed in the Media and Communications list last week.

Last week in the courts

On 7 to 10 July 2025, Heather Williams J heard the trial in the defamation case of Chaudry v Qureshi KB-2022-003483.  Judgement was reserved.

On Wednesday 9 July 2025, there was a pre-trial review before Deputy High Court Judge Susie Allegre in the breach of confidence case of Ahluwalia v Verma KB-2023-001466.

As already mentioned, on Friday 11 July 2025, Nicklin J handed down judgment in the phone hacking case of Baroness Lawrence & Ors v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2025] EWHC 1716 (KB).  Judgment was also handed down by Richard Spearman KC  in the case of Dowding v The Character Group plc [2025] EWHC 1755 (KB).

On the same day there was a summary judgment application in the defamation case of Whyte v British Medical Association KB-2024-002315.

Media law in other jurisdictions

Australia

On 9 July 2025, the Supreme Court of Western Australia dismissed an application by Mr Trott and his company TSA to stay or strike out a defamation claim brought by business rival Mr McCormack in the case of McCormack v Trott [2025] WASC 276. The claim arose from comments Trott made to the media, alleging McCormack directed an employee to enrol in a TSA course to steal intellectual property. The defendants argued the case was an abuse of process due to its overlap with earlier copyright proceedings and delays in filing. However, the court found the defamation claim was legally distinct, the prior dispute had been settled without trial, and the claim was properly pleaded.

In response to shocking child abuse allegations at a Melbourne childcare centre, governments and providers are considering or accelerating the rollout of CCTV in early education settings. While intended as a safety measure, experts warn that constant surveillance of over a million children raises serious privacy, data security, and ethical concerns. Critics argue that CCTV may create a false sense of security, can’t cover all areas legally, and risks hacking or misuse of footage. With no clear guidelines yet in place for footage storage or access, early childhood experts have urged caution and explained that deeper systemic reforms are needed beyond surveillance. The BBC, Guardian and ABC covered the story.

Canada

Chinese CCTV company, Hikvision is fighting a Canadian government ban that ordered it to cease operations over national security concerns. Following a federal review under the Investment Canada Act, authorities concluded that Hikvision posed a threat and barred its products from use by government institutions. In response, the company has filed legal action seeking a judicial review and a stay of the ban, allowing it to temporarily resume operations. Global Times, Global Competition Review and Info Security reported on the development.

India

Several international news outlets reported that their X accounts had been blocked in India due to a legal order requiring the blocking of over 2,300 accounts under threat of criminal sanctions. X claimed it was given one hour to comply with the order under Section 69A of the IT act, however the Indian authorities denied issuing any such order, claiming that the mistake arose from a delay in implementing a previous order issued in May. The Committee to Protect Journalists urged the Indian government to ensure transparency and due process when restricting social media. CNBC, Reuters, Al Jazeera, Hindustan Times and Jurist covered the story.

Ireland

A coalition of campaigners, academics, and media groups, including RTÉ, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, and the Committee to Protect Journalists, has strongly criticised Ireland’s Defamation (Amendment) Bill 2024, which passed the Dali and is now in the Seanad, for failing to meet EU standards on protecting against Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs). While the bill includes anti-SLAPP measures for defamation cases, it excludes other causes of action, such as privacy and copyright claims, which the group argues are often used to silence public interest speech. Read the joint statement in full here. The Irish Times and ICLG have more information.

The Supreme Court dismissed appeals in a defamation case involving the Limerick Leader, which mistakenly identified the Respondent as a tax defaulter. The publisher claimed qualified privilege under the Defamation Act 2009, arguing that it acted in good faith by fulfilling its duty to report on matters of public interest. However, the Court ruled that the common law and statutory defences of qualified privilege does not extend to inaccurate publications made to the public at large, as it lacks the required mutual duty or interest and was materially inaccurate. It also upheld the respondent’s entitlement to full High Court costs, rejecting the appellant’s argument for reduced costs. The judgement is available in full here. Irish Legal News, Irish Examiner, Breaking News and EchoLive covered the ruling.

Caretaker, Eric Swift, lost his defamation claim for up to €75,000 against a Dublin Lidl store and its security firm after alleging he was wrongly accused of theft. Swift claimed he was publicly confronted after placing a wine bottle in his bag, then returning it to the shelf. The court found the security guard acted in good faith, having not seen the bottle returned, and that any remarks made were protected by qualified privilege. The judge dismissed the case, accepting the defence’s version of events that the request to return to the store was made discreetly and without any allegations of theft. The Irish Times, Irish Independent and The Journal covered the judgement.

Italy

DLA Piper’s Privacy Matters blog has an article about a recent decision of the Italian Data Protection Authority, Garante, which has substantially changed the rules on marketing consent. The decision may require the adoption of a two-stage opt-in process in order to obtain consent, however it is currently unclear whether this is compulsory, as such a requirement would exceed the standards imposed in other EU countries.

Latvia

Russian-Latvian billionaire Pjotrs Avens has filed a criminal complaint against Latvian Foreign Minister Baiba Braže, accusing her of defamation over remarks made in a Diena interview, according to the Baltic News Network. Braže reportedly referred to Avens as “Putin’s personal banker” and claimed he laundered money for the Russian president. Avens denies the allegations. The dispute follows the lifting of EU sanctions against Avens, which Latvia has appealed on the basis of evidence of his alleged support for Russian actions in Ukraine.

Research and Resources

Next week in the courts

Between Monday 14 July and Friday 18 July 2025, there will be a trial in the case of Hegab (“Hijab”) v The Spectator (1828) Ltd and another KB-2023-003636.

On Tuesday 15 and Wednesday 16 July, there will be a 1.5 day hearing of applications in the case of KB-2022-004388 Andrew Hale-Byrne v Secretary of State for Business & Trade.

On Friday 18 July, there will be a one day application for a split trial and a stay in the case of Odey v Financial Times Limited KB-2024-001562.

Reserved judgements

Chaudry v Qureshi, 7 – 10 July 2025, (Heather Williams J)

Kul and Ors v DWF Law LLP – 4 and 5 June 2025 (Eady J).

Baroness Lawrence of Clarendon v Associated Newspapers, 6 and 7 May 2025 (Nicklin J).

Clarke v Guardian News and Media, 4 March – 4 April and 11 April 2025 (Steyn J).

 This Round Up was compiled by Jasleen Chaggar who is the Legal and Policy Officer at Big Brother Watch.