scholarly journals Balancing the right to privacy and freedom of expression: Re-evaluating Hosking v Runting in the light of recent developments in English privacy law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Abby Ward
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Public Places ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Privacy Law ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
The Right

<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>

scholarly journals Balancing the right to privacy and freedom of expression: Re-evaluating Hosking v Runting in the light of recent developments in English privacy law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Abby Ward
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Public Places ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Privacy Law ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
The Right

<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>

19. Breach of confidence: Trade secrets and private information

2019 ◽  
pp. 483-512
Author(s):  
Stavroula Karapapa ◽  
Luke McDonagh
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Private Information ◽  
Technical Information ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Trade Secrets ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Common Definition ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

This chapter studies breach of confidence. In the United Kingdom, the area of breach of confidence has traditionally been used to protect ideas and information, including trade secrets. The doctrine of breach of confidence is judge-made law, rooted in equitable principles. In consequence, it has developed in a piecemeal, and sometimes contradictory fashion, so that the rationale for the action has not always been clear. Nevertheless, the law of confidence is broad enough in the United Kingdom to encompass: the common definition of a trade secret (commercial, usually technical information); personal, private information which may also have a commercial value (including information which may be protected under the right to privacy under Art. 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)); and information protected by the state. The chapter then looks at the role of trade secrets in intellectual property law and considers the EU Trade Secrets Directive.

scholarly journals Protection of privacy in Malaysia: A law for the future

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Zuryati Mohamed Yusoff
Keyword(s):  
Private Information ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Privacy Law ◽  
Privacy Act ◽  
Federal Constitution ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right

<p>In Malaysia, the rights and liberties of the individual are recognised in the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. However, the right to privacy does not have the express constitutional recognition enjoyed by other rights such as the right to life and liberty and freedom of expression. This thesis identifies gaps in the protection of privacy interests in the current legal framework. There is no self-standing law on privacy in Malaysia, though there are several laws which provide limited rights to privacy such as the laws on data protection and criminal law. The existing laws are inadequate to protect private information and to protect against the intrusion of privacy. The importation of foreign principles through the reception of English Common Law offers only limited protection. Malaysia should, therefore, have a specific law to protect privacy. With a view to attaining that goal for Malaysia, this thesis undertakes a comparative analysis of two different experiences of the development of the law of privacy. They are the privacy law in England, which is largely based on the law of breach of confidence, and the privacy law in New Zealand, which has a distinct privacy tort recognised in its case law. The conclusion is that those countries’ experience can inform developments in Malaysia, and that the best way for Malaysia to develop its law now is by the enactment of a specific Privacy Act.</p>

scholarly journals PASSPORTS, THE RIGHT TO TRAVEL, AND NATIONAL SECURITY IN THE COMMONWEALTH

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 365-395
Author(s):  
Paul F. Scott
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
National Security ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Statutory Basis

AbstractThis article, on the basis of a consideration of the development of the law relating to the use of passports as a tool of national security in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, challenges the common law conception of passports, arguing that passports effectively confer rights and so, consequentially, that the refusal or withdrawal of a passport represents a denial of rights. From this conclusion a number of points flow. Though these consequences are most acute for the United Kingdom and Canada, in which passports remain regulated by, and are issued under, prerogative powers, there are also a number of points of significance for Australia and New Zealand, where passports have a statutory basis.

The Need for a Constitution in the United Kingdom

1979 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-285
Author(s):  
Wilberforce
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Flexible Instrument ◽  
The Common ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

I was not surprised when, from several alternative subjects, you chose, as the title of my Lecture, the need for a Constitution in Britain. Those of us without a written constitution are indeed, a select club—New Zealand, Israel, the United Kingdom.I will start with a quotation from Lord Salmon. In a recent lecture, he said: In this country [U.K.] we have an unwritten constitution. I have always regarded this as a blessing and never agreed with the theoretical objections to it. It is superbly flexible and above all it has stood the test of time. It works—and works admirably. But I am beginning to wonder whether it might not be wise to evolve, not an elaborate written constitution but perhaps the equivalent of a modern Bill of Rights. A statute which should lay down our basic freedoms, provide for their preservation and enact that it could not be repealed save by, say, a 75% majority of both Houses of Parliament.One can recognize in this passage the views of an eminent common lawyer, believing in the strength and potentialities of the common law as a flexible instrument, in, of course, the right hands: of one who believes deeply in human freedom, and who is concerned about the threat to it: who desires an explicit definition of the basic liberties and who believes that these can be protected by a sufficiently strong, entrenched, legal system. In this he undoubtedly reflects the views of many people, probably of the majority of ordinary men.

scholarly journals A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE PRACTICE OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND MALAYSIA IN RESPECT OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nazli Ismail @ Nawang
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
International Law ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Great Influence ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

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.

scholarly journals The scope of rights of appeal (not recourse) from arbitration awards

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Benjamin Suter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Law Courts ◽  
Model Law ◽  
The Right

<p>This paper examines the scope of rights of appeal from arbitration awards in New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States.  In countries that have drafted their legislation after the UNCITRAL Model Law appeals are often excluded and only recourse based on very narrow grounds is available. While many countries are more permissive with regards to appeals than the Model Law in that they allow the parties to opt for more expansive review, none of the examined jurisdictions give the parties the right to opt for appeals on questions of law and fact.  In several cases parties have tried to expand the rights of appeal by agreement. Such agreements are deemed invalid in all jurisdictions. When examining whether the invalid clause renders the entire arbitration agreement invalid, courts in common law jurisdictions have applied the doctrine of severance in some variations. Civil law courts usually examine whether the parties would have concluded the contract without the invalid clause (“but for”-test).  This paper suggests that many of these tests are not suitable for arbitration agreements where the parties do not exchange considerations but rather promise one another exactly the same. The preferable approach is to combine the “but for”-test with a test that assesses if severance alters the nature of the agreement.</p>

scholarly journals One meta-media event, two forms of censorship: The Charlie Hebdo affair in the United Kingdom and Turkey

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-101
Author(s):  
Lyombe Eko ◽  
Lea Hellmueller
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Editorial Decisions ◽  
The Right ◽  
Cultural Pressures ◽  
Media Event ◽  
Charlie Hebdo

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.

scholarly journals Licensed to kill…discourse? agents provocateurs and a purposive right to freedom of expression

2021 ◽  
pp. 092405192110334
Author(s):  
Katie Pentney
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Police Services ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
Scant Attention ◽  
The Right

Undercover police operations have emerged from the shadows and into the spotlight in the United Kingdom as a result of a public inquiry into undercover policing and the enactment of the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Act. The inquiry has revealed troubling details about the ways intelligence and police services have wielded their powers to infiltrate and undermine political groups and social movements over the course of five decades. The problem is not exclusive to the United Kingdom, but is seen the world over. Yet despite the widescale nature of the problem, the legality of agents provocateurs – undercover officers who infiltrate social and political movements to manipulate their messaging, instigate violent tactics and undermine public perception – has received scant attention in legal scholarship or the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. This article capitalises on the current spotlight to suggest that agents provocateurs can and should be conceived of as (potential) violations of the right to freedom of expression under the European Convention on Human Rights. A purposive approach is required to ensure protection for not only the means of expression – the exchange of information and ideas – but also the ends – vibrant democratic discourse and meaningful public debate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document