Cases

WB v H Bauer Publishing Ltd

Comment

This decision does little to advance the protection afforded to privacy in English law following the adoption of the Human Rights Act 1998. The claimant clearly had a right to anonymity by virtue of the 1973 Rules and the House of Lords Order. Where this is inadvertently breached, it would appear that the court is not willing to impose any liability even if the breach amounted to a contempt of court. The claimant would have had a strong case for a breach of his right to presumption of innocence under Article 6(2) ECHR and/or Article 8 ECHR at the European Court of Human Rights because of the failure of the UK authorities to publicise and enforce the House of Lords Order. The finding that publication of such information in a national newspaper does not necessarily put it into the public domain is significant, however, in recognising the difference between confidential and private information.

Areas of work

Contempt
Human Rights
Media Law
Privacy and Confidence
Publishing

Also