The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog

Category: Caselaw (Page 1 of 26)

Case Law, Strasbourg: IVT v Romania, Broadcast of interview with child without parental consent breached Article 8 – Hugh Tomlinson QC

In the case of IVT v Romania ([2022] ECHR 189) the Fourth Section of the European Court of Human Rights found that the domestic courts had breached an 11 year old ‘s Article 8 rights in dismissing her claim based on the broadcast of an television interview which had been conducted without obtaining parental consent.  Although the child’s face was blurred she was still identifiable  on the broadcast. The Court emphasised that parental consent was not a mere formality but was an important safeguard for the rights of children. Continue reading

Case Law: Griffiths v Tickle, Former MP loses appeal against publication of details of his abuse of his wife – Adam Glass

In a case highly dependent on its very unusual facts, the Court of Appeal in Griffiths v Tickle ([2021] EWCA Civ 1882) confirmed (in dismissing an appeal) that a mother and father involved in Children Act 1989 proceedings can be identified.  It agreed that a previous fact-finding judgment[pdf] by Her Honour Judge Williscroft at Derby County Court in November 2020, in relation to allegations of serious sexual abuse, coercive and controlling behaviour, and violence, perpetrated by the husband on his ex-wife over a 10 year period, could be published (with relatively modest redactions relating to family members and the identity of the child). Continue reading

Case Law: Fairhurst v Woodard, Neighbour CCTV harassment and data protection claim succeeds – Percy Preston

Ring Video Doorbell 2 image 1On 12 October 2021, Oxford County Court handed down judgment in Fairhurst v Woodard (Case No: G00MK161).  A dispute between neighbours over the use of cameras for security purposes, the case gave rise to successful claims in harassment and data protection, and offers an important note of caution for those looking to install surveillance systems to protect their homes. Continue reading

Case Law, Strasbourg: Sanchez v France, Politician fined for failing to delete Facebook hate speech, no violation of Article 10

In the case of Sanchez v France [2021] ECHR 724 (available only in French) the Fifth Section of the Court of Human Rights held that the conviction of a politician for failing to promptly delete unlawful comments published by third parties on the public wall of his Facebook account did not breach his Article 10 rights despite his apparent lack of knowledge of the comments. Continue reading

Case Law, Canada: ES v Shillington, Damages of $155,000 award for new privacy tort – Craig Xu

In the case of ES v Shillington (2021 ABQB 739) by Madam Justice Avril Inglis of Alberta’s Court of Queen’s Bench in awarded a total of total $460,000 of damages for assault, sexual assault, battery, and intentional infliction of mental distress, including $155,000 for damages suffered as a result of the defendant sharing sexual images of the plaintiff on the internet without her consent. Continue reading

Case law, Strasbourg: SIC Sociedade Independente de Comunicação v Portugal, Record award of libel damages breached Article 10 – Mike Dodd

In the case of SIC – Sociedade Independente de Comunicação v Portugal ([2021] ECHR 703) the Fourth Section of the European Court of Human Rights held that an award of damages totalling €146,000 euros (about £124,200) – a record in Portugal – to a politician wrongly linked to an investigation into a paedophile scandal in the Azores was disproportionate and could have a chilling effect on freedom of expression. Continue reading

Case Law, Strasbourg: Hájovský v. Slovakia, Further Guidance On Rights-Balancing and Photographs – Rebecca Moosavian

Photographic technology has raised questions about the privacy of those captured since its emergence in the latter half of the nineteenth century.  The case of Hájovský v. Slovakia  ([2021] ECHR 591) the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) returned to the tricky, topical issue of the degree of protection Article 8 affords the filmed or photographed individual. Continue reading

Case Law: Vardy v Rooney, Wagatha Christie: Court rules on strike out and summary judgment application – Adham Harker

The ‘Wagatha Christie litigation’, as it is affectionately known, is the fascinating case of mistrust between friends and a sting operation to find a leak.  Colleen Rooney (wife of footballer Wayne) became concerned that ‘stories’ she was publishing to her private Instagram account – to which only her actual friends had access – were being reported in the Sun newspaper. Continue reading

« Older posts

© 2022 Inforrm's Blog

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑