The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog

Tag: Hugh Tomlinson QC (Page 1 of 6)

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, Strasbourg: Hurbain v Belgium, Order to anonymise newspaper archive did not violate Article 10 – Hugh Tomlinson QC and Aidan Wills

In the case of Hurbain v Belgium [2021] ECHR 544 (in French only), the European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), held that an order to anonymise an article in a newspaper’s electronic archive (which referred to a person’s involvement in a fatal road traffic accident for which they were subsequently convicted) did not breach the applicant publisher’s right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Continue reading

Case Law: Webb v Jones, Facebook libel claimants beware! – Hugh Tomlinson QC

In the case of Webb v Jones  [2021] EWHC 1618 (QB) Griffiths J struck out a claim for libel based on seven Facebook posts due a of serious deficiencies in the particulars of claim.  He refused permission to amend on the basis that the case was “unwinnable”. The case provides important lessons for those dealing with libel claims based on social media posts. Continue reading

Case Law, Strasbourg: Milosavljević v. Serbia, Public official’s defamation judgment over serious false allegations did not violate Article 10 – Hugh Tomlinson QC

In the case of Milosavljević v. Serbia ([2021] ECHR 441) the Court of Human Rights, Second Section, dismissed an Article 10 complaint by a journalist who had been subject to an adverse defamation judgment in respect of an article accusing a local public official of trying to rape an underage Romani girl. Continue reading

Case Law: R (on the application of Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales, Police use of “automatic facial recognition technology unlawful – Hugh Tomlinson QC

In the case of R (on the application of Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales Police ([2020] EWCA Civ 1058) the Court of Appeal held that the live automated facial recognition technology (“AFR”) used by the South Wales Police Force (“SWP”) was unlawful as it was not “in accordance with law” for the purposes of Article 8 of the ECHR. Continue reading

Case Law: ZXC v Bloomberg LP, Court of Appeal upholds the privacy rights of suspects – Hugh Tomlinson QC

In an important privacy judgment handed down on Friday 15 May 2020 in the case of ZXC v Bloomberg LP ([2020] EWCA 611) the Court of Appeal upheld Nicklin J’s finding that the publication of an article containing confidential information obtained from a UK law enforcement agency which was investigating a businessman was a misuse of private information. Continue reading

Case Law: Rudd v Bridle, Asbestos industry advisor ordered to answer physician’s subject access requests – Hugh Tomlinson QC

In Rudd v Bridle [2019] EWHC 893 (QB), Warby J tried a number of issues arising out of a data subject access request (“DSAR”) under s.7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (“the DPA 1998”). He held that information provided to the Claimant was inadequate, rejected the Defendant’s entitlement to rely on three claimed exemptions and ordered him to provide the Claimant with further information. Continue reading

“Britain requires an independent regulator with teeth”, the belated (partial) conversion of the British Press to effective regulation – Hugh Tomlinson QC

For 70 years the British press has resolutely resisted any form of independent regulation. The oligarchs who control the large media corporations have successfully resisted the regulatory recommendations of inquiries from the 1949 Royal Commission on the Press to the 2012 Leveson Report. Continue reading

« Older posts

© 2023 Inforrm's Blog

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑