scholarly journals Public places, private lives: Balancing of privacy and freedom of expression in the United Kingdom

Author(s):  
Bryce Clayton Newell
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Abby Ward

<p>This paper examines the potential impact of recent English privacy jurisprudence on the New Zealand tort of privacy. The paper contrasts the New Zealand Court of Appeal’s aversion towards an over-expansive privacy right expressed in Hosking v Runting with an increasing readiness to override freedom of expression in favour of privacy interests in the United Kingdom. Three central conflicts in the courts’ reasoning are addressed in detail, namely privacy’s relationship with public places, individuals with public profiles and mediums of publication. While developments in English privacy law highlight reasoning flaws and theoretical shortcomings in Hosking, the increasing influence European jurisprudence on English law may nevertheless justify some divergence in the two jurisdictions’ balancing of privacy and freedom of expression.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Abby Ward

<p>This paper examines the potential impact of recent English privacy jurisprudence on the New Zealand tort of privacy. The paper contrasts the New Zealand Court of Appeal’s aversion towards an over-expansive privacy right expressed in Hosking v Runting with an increasing readiness to override freedom of expression in favour of privacy interests in the United Kingdom. Three central conflicts in the courts’ reasoning are addressed in detail, namely privacy’s relationship with public places, individuals with public profiles and mediums of publication. While developments in English privacy law highlight reasoning flaws and theoretical shortcomings in Hosking, the increasing influence European jurisprudence on English law may nevertheless justify some divergence in the two jurisdictions’ balancing of privacy and freedom of expression.</p>


2005 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 895-907
Author(s):  
Monique C. Lillard

The European Court of Human Rights has issued a judgment which adds to the developing law of Article 6, Section 1 (right to a fair hearing) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR or “the Convention”) and which sheds light on Article 10 (freedom of expression) and its interaction with the law of defamation. Practically, the decision in Steel and Morris v. the United Kingdom (hereinafter referred to as Steel) is likely to prompt a review of the availability of legal aid for defendants in civil cases in the United Kingdom (“UK”), and may be a small step towards balancing the arms in ad terrorem suits brought by large corporations against private citizens in order to silence public debate.


Author(s):  
Nazli Ismail @ Nawang

International law, particularly treaties on human rights, has great influence on the development of the right to freedom of expression. The application of international treaties is very much dependant on the constitutions of individual countries and these constitutions to a large extent are dissimilar from one to another. The position in the United Kingdom is relatively unique since the country has no codified written constitution to safeguard the fundamental right to freedom of expression and as a result it was regarded as residual in nature. Nonetheless, the provisions of the international treaties, particularly the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) have altered this position and accordingly freedom of expression has been formally incorporated into the UK law via the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA). Meanwhile, the international human rights treaties is considered to have less influence in Malaysia arguably since the country has a written constitution (the Federal Constitution) that contains a specific part on fundamental liberties including the right to freedom of expression. Keywords: International law, treaties, freedom of expression.


2000 ◽  
Vol 11 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 413-416

In the area of non-pecuniary damages, the “especially grave” interferences with the private lives of the applicants were profoundly destabilising events in their lives which had and continued to have a significant emotional and psychological impact on each of them, justifying a significant award of non-pecuniary damages. In the area of pecuniary damages, a judgment in which the Court finds a violation of the Convention imposes on the respondent State a legal obligation to make reparation for its consequences in such a way as to restore as far as possible the situation existing before the breach. The question to be decided was the level of just satisfaction, in respect of both past and future pecuniary loss, which it was necessary to award to each applicant.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-101
Author(s):  
Lyombe Eko ◽  
Lea Hellmueller

This study analyses British and Turkish media conceptualizations of the Charlie Hebdo affair. Editorial decisions to republish or not to republish the Mohammed cartoon cover reflected the politico-cultural pressures on the journalistic fields in both countries. The controversy demonstrated that the editorial autonomy of the British media outlets enabled them to engage in ‘eclectic neutrality’, the right to decide to republish or not to republish the cartoons. Despite the severely constrained journalistic environment of Turkey, where expectations of respect for religion take precedence over freedom of expression, the Turkish media engaged in symbolic acts of resistance in furtherance of freedom of expression.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document