Case Law, Strasbourg: ML and WW v Germany, Article 8 right to be forgotten and the media – Hugh Tomlinson QC and Aidan Wills

4 07 2018

In the case of ML and WW v Germany ([2018] ECHR 554) (available only French), the Fifth Section of the Court of Human Rights dismissed an Article 8 “right to be forgotten” application in respect of the historic publication by the media of information concerning a murder conviction. Read the rest of this entry »





Do Companies have a right to reputation under the European Convention on Human Rights, Part 2 – David Acheson

21 06 2018

The first part of this post considered the question of whether Art 8 of the Convention protects corporate reputation and concluded that the Court’s case law does not provide any good justification for this. Read the rest of this entry »





Do Companies have a right to reputation under the European Convention on Human Rights, Part 1 – David Acheson

19 06 2018

In contrast to the frequent discussion of the European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence establishing that individual reputation falls within the scope of the Article 8 right to ‘private and family life’, the possibility that corporations could claim a Convention right to reputation – under either Art 8 or Article 1 of Protocol 1 (‘A1P1’), the right to property – has not attracted a great deal of attention from commentators. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Stomakhin v Russia, No overbroad suppression of extremist opinions and ‘hate speech’ – Dirk Voorhoof

14 06 2018

In its recent judgment in Stomakhin v. Russia, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) launched the message to all domestic authorities to adopt a “cautious approach” in determining the scope of “hate speech” crimes and to avoid “excessive interference” with the right to freedom of expression, especially when action is taken against ‘hate speech’ or extremist opinions that are mere criticism of the government, state institutions and their policies and practices. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Benedik v Slovenia: Police need court order to access subscriber information associated with a dynamic IP address – Argyro Chatzinikolaou

9 06 2018

In its judgement in the case of Benedik v Slovenia the Fourth Section of the Court held i that there had been a violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) with regard to the failure of the Slovenian police to obtain a court order before accessing subscriber information associated with a dynamic IP address[1]. Read the rest of this entry »





The Data Protection Bill, Human Rights and the Daily Mail – Hugh Tomlinson QC

8 05 2018

On Wednesday 9 May 2018, the House of Commons will deal with the Report Stage of Data Protection Bill. [pdf]  Two amendments relevant to press regulation have been proposed. Read the rest of this entry »





Why the business model of social media giants like Facebook is incompatible with human rights – Sarah Joseph

4 04 2018

File 20180329 189824 1k13qax.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1Facebook has had a bad few weeks. The social media giant had to apologise for failing to protect the personal data of millions of users from being accessed by data mining company Cambridge Analytica. Outrage is brewing over its admission to spying on people via their Android phones. Its stock price plummeted, while millions deleted their accounts in disgust. Read the rest of this entry »