‘In December 2015, the European Court of Human Rights, by 6 votes to 1, dismissed a Romanian national’s appeal against his employer’s decision to terminate his contract for using a professional Yahoo Messenger account to send personal messages to his fiancé and brother.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 14th January 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Employers can read workers’ private messages sent via chat software and webmail accounts during working hours, judges have ruled.’
BBC News, 13th January 2016
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘MPs and peers are to challenge the home secretary, Theresa May, on the privacy implications and detailed operation of her snooper’s charter legislation when she appears before the bill’s parliamentary scrutiny committee.’
The Guardian, 13th January 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The information commissioner’s office has heavily criticised the draft Investigatory Powers bill for attacking individuals’ privacy, particularly in relation to the apparent requirement on communication providers to weaken or break their data encryption at the government’s request.’
The Guardian, 12th January 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The use and value of ‘internet connection records’ (ICRs) in helping detect, prevent and investigate serious crime and terrorism should be assessed to help decide whether providers should be forced to collect the data, the UK’s information commissioner has said.’
OUT-LAW.com, 11th January 2016
Source: www.out-law.com
‘On 15 December 2015 the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) issued Telegraph Media Group Limited (the Telegraph) with a Monetary Penalty Notice (see here) under section 55A of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998) following a “serious contravention” of Regulation 22 of the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 (PECR 2003).’
RPC Data and Privacy Law, 30th December 2015
Source: www.rpc.co.uk
‘It is panto season, and everyone loves a good villain. This Christmas’ Wicked Stepmother is the Mirror Group who, when asking ‘Mirror, Mirror on the wall, who is the most liable of them all?’ has received the answer from the Court of Appeal that they are and must pay the consequences.’
Panopticon, 17th December 2015
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘It has been a mixed day for the media’s entanglements with the judiciary. Chris Knight posted earlier today about the unhappy outcome for Mirror Group Newspapers before the Court of Appeal in the Gulati privacy damages litigation arising from phone-hacking. News Group Newspapers, however – together with Sun journalist claims Tom Newton Dunn, Anthony France and Craig Woodehouse – had a happier outcome in another case about telephone privacy, though this time with the media as victim rather than perpetrator of the interference.’
Panopticon, 17th December 2015
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘It began in December 2005 when the Metropolitan police started an investigation into the hacking of Prince William’s phone and has ended exactly 10 years later. In the intervening period, hundreds lost their jobs and many more reputations were both shredded and made, mainly on the legal benches.’
The Guardian, 11th December 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Last week, The Mirror reported that John Leslie was being questioned by police in connection with an alleged sexual assault. The report contained photographs of the police with evidence bags outside Leslie’s house. The Mirror reminded its readers of allegations made against the former TV presenter in 2002 and 2008. This the most recent example of media reports concerning allegations of sexual offences involving public figures.’
Doughty Street, 2nd December 2015
Source: www.doughtystreet.co.uk
‘David Miranda, the partner of the former Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald, has launched a fresh appeal challenging the legality of his detention under counter-terrorism powers for nine hours at Heathrow airport in 2013.’
The Guardian, 8th December 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘A Manchester-based property developer cannot claim litigation privilege for secret recordings of meetings where witnesses were “deliberately deceived”, the High Court has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 8th December 2015
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘On 23 November 2015 Sir Michael Tugendhat set aside an order for service out of the jurisdiction of proceedings for the misuse of private information and libel which had been made by Master Roberts on 31 March 2015 in respect of an article in Politika, a Serbian language newspaper circulating in Serbia and neighbouring countries in hard copy and available in this country only on the internet. Sir Michael held that the Claimant was in breach of his duty of full and frank disclosure and the case is a significant reminder of the duty of candour that rests upon a claimant when seeking permission to serve outside the jurisdiction under CPR 6.36 and of the perils of over-enthusiastic attempts to squeeze foreign claims into this jurisdiction. The case is also important on the question of how section 9(2) Defamation Act 2013 requiring evidence that England and Wales is “clearly the most appropriate place in which to bring an action in respect of the statement” is to be interpreted and the burden it places on a Claimant which the judge decided had not been discharged in this case.’
RPC Data and Privacy Law, 7th December 2015
Source: www.rpc.co.uk
‘Although most readers of this blog will be familiar, to some extent, with the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 (“PECR”), they are a rarely sighted beast in the reported jurisprudence. Panopticon is aware of individual damages claims brought in the County Courts for small sums, but even they are few and far between.’
Panopticon, 2nd December 2015
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘The regulatory body said insurers are going to great lengths to harvest personal data.’
Daily Telegraph, 25th November 2015
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘As all celebrities know, to get the High Court to stop paparazzi pictures of you from being published, the first thing you have to do is show you had a reasonable expectation of privacy. But what if you were snapped outside of the jurisdiction and whilst English law principles suggest that you did have such an expectation, the local law where the photographs were taken says you do not?’
Panopticon, 23rd November 2015
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
‘It is a ghastly truth that newspapers come into their own when something terrible has happened. The horrors witnessed in Paris just over a week ago resulted in some excellent reporting and analysis. There have been some exceptions – though, given the confused nature of the situation, that is perhaps inevitable.’
The Independent, 22nd November 2015
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘An action in defamation and under the right to privacy against Facebook has been dismissed in the High Court. The Facebook entity named as defendant did not “control” the publication so as to allow liability; and even if it did, no claim under the Human Rights Act could lie against FB as it could not be described as any sort of a public authority for the purposes of Section 6 of the Act.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 9th November 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Data protection arrangements should be reviewed in the modern world of social media and cybercrime, a specialist solicitor has said, after it emerged the Crown Prosecution Service delivered unencrypted DVDs to a film studio for 12 years.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 9th November 2015
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024