In Graiseley Properties Limited and others v Barclays Bank Plc [2013] EWHC 67 (Comm) Mr Justice Flaux refused an application for anonymity orders made by 106 employees and former employees of Barclays in a test case arising from the LIBOR scandal on the basis that they had not established that it was strictly necessary for the proper administration of justice within Article 10(2) [57]. Whilst the outcome is not particularly surprising, the part of the judgment relating to the application of Article 8 is curious and merits further consideration. Continue reading
The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog
Tag: Article 8 (Page 4 of 4)
The case of Bristol City Council v C and others ([2012] EWHC 3748 (Fam)) was an application for a reporting restriction order arising out of care proceedings conducted before the Bristol Family Proceedings Court. The proceedings themselves were relatively straightforward but, in the course of the hearing, information came to light which gave rise to concerns of an “unusual nature”, which alerted the interest of the press. Continue reading
The Panopticon Blog has reported recently on the ICO’s new Code of Practice on Anonymisation. That Code offers guidance for ensuring data protection-compliant disclosure in difficult cases such as those involving apparently anonymous statistics, and situations where someone with inside knowledge (or a ‘motivated intruder’) could identify someone referred to anonymously in a disclosed document. The Upper Tribunal in Information Commissioner v Magherafelt District Council ([2012] UKUT 263 AAC) grappled with those issues earlier this year in the context of disclosing a summarised schedule of disciplinary action. Continue reading
Earlier this month, the Strasbourg Court handed down two interesting decisions involving freedom of expression. In Alkaya v Turkey (no. 42811/06, 9 October 2012)(in French only), the Court held that the disclosure of the home address of a Turkish actress (pictured) in a newspaper article was a violation of her right to private life under Article 8 ECHR. Continue reading
On 19 June 2012 in the cases of Kurier Zeitungsverlag und Druckerei GmbH (No. 2) v. Austria (Application no. 1593/06) and Krone Verlag GmbH v. Austria (no. 27306/07), the First Section of the European Court of Human Rights In Chamber judgments held that there had been no violation of Article 10 in two cases in which newspapers had revealed the identity of a child and published photographs from which he could be recognised. The publications were an interference with the child’s private life, and that the compensation of €9,000 and €130,000 was proportionate. Continue reading
Recent Judgments
© 2026 Inforrm's Blog
Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑