In recent years there has been a new focus by media lawyers on the operation of the “statutory privacy” provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 (“the DPA”). The Leveson Report and the resulting ICO publication “Data Protection and Journalism: a guide for the media” (“the ICO Guide”) has reminded us that the media must comply with the provisions of the act. Most importantly, the Court of Appeal’s “deletion” of section 13(2) (see our post here) has meant that general damages for distress are now available in DPA claims without proof of financial loss. Continue reading
The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog
Tag: Hugh Tomlinson QC (Page 3 of 6)
Section 32 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (“the DPA”) contains a curious provision apparently designed to prevent “pre-publication” claims where unpublished journalistic, literary or artistic material is involved. There is no basis for this provision in the Data Protection Directive (“the Directive”) and it appears to be inconsistent with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and a clear candidate for disapplication. Continue reading
The Court of Human Rights has held that the fact that singer was well known to the public and been the subject of well publicised rumours about her sexuality did not justify the broadcast of interviews about her relationships and sexuality. In the case of Rubio Dosamantes v Spain (Judgment of 21 February 2017)(in French only) the Third Section held that the dismissal of the applicant’s domestic claims was a breach of her Article 8 rights. Continue reading
Over the past few weeks the national press has ramped up its dishonest and unprincipled campaign against the implementation of the Leveson recommendations. It finances and promotes something called “Free the Press” – which, among other things, offers a series of misleading and inaccurate graphics to place in anti-Leveson articles. Continue reading
The local press has, over the past few weeks, been running an anti-Leveson campaign in response to the Government’s unfair and unbalanced consultation on the implementation of Leveson. The themes are familiar: local newspapers are the life blood of democracy, they didn’t do phone hacking but they will be financially ruined if section 40 is implemented. Continue reading
In the case of Olivier G v Le Soir (29 April 2016, n° C.15.0052.F [pdf]) the Belgian Court of Cassation decided that, as the result of the “right to be forgotten”, a newspaper had been properly ordered to anonymise the online version of a 1994 article concerning a fatal road traffic accident. Continue reading
Universities are under increasing pressure from government to prevent students coming into contact with “extreme” ideas. The view is that students exposed to any kind of views designated “extreme” could be drawn into terrorism. But the risk to freedom of speech and academic freedom is obvious. Society needs to avoid a climate in which ideas are seen as dangerous, deviant and extremist if they differ from views that are believed to be held by the majority. Continue reading
In the case of Sousa Goucha v Portugal ([2016] ECHR 284) the Fourth Section of the European Court of Human Rights held that the dismissal of a domestic defamation action by a gay television presenter was not a breach of his Article 8 right to reputation or of the prohibition of discrimination in Article 14. The Court deferred to the reasoning of the domestic court that a “joke” suggesting that the applicant was female was not defamatory. Continue reading
In the case of Pinto Coelho v Portugal (No.2) ([2016] ECHR 296)(only in French) the Fourth Section of the Court of Human Rights held (by a 6:1 majority) that the imposition of a fine on a journalist who had published unauthorised audio recordings of a criminal trial was a breach of Article 10. The case has potentially wide implications for jurisdictions such as England and Wales which continue to prohibit the transmission of recordings of criminal trials. Continue reading
In the case of Société de Conception de Presse et d’Édition v. France ([2016] ECHR 216)(only in French), the Court of Human Rights, Fifth Section, held that a French court’s order that the publishers of Choc magazine should black out a photograph taken by the captors and torturers of a man who died did not violate their Article 10 rights. Continue reading
Recent Judgments
© 2026 Inforrm's Blog
Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑