ROSELAWMediaAndMore.TV
The Human Rights Act 1998 effectively confers via Article 8 of the European Convention, a right to Privacy.
This right is often cited by celebrities to protect themselves from invasion of privacy.
However, it is often challenged by publishers who prefer to focus on Article 10, the right to freedom of expression and thus free speech.
The law is ever developing on a case by case basis in the UK. The development of privacy case will be particularly interesting now that Britian has left the EU.
The right to privacy is often closely associated with the responsibility to maintain confidentiality. Such obligation often arises in relation to commercial or professional relationships. Breach of such confidentiality is a common cause for legal action in such scenarios.
In both cases, injunctions are often sought by the violated party to prevent further breaches of privacy or confidentiality and in order to maximize damage limitation.
Recently, media law saw the birth of the “Super Injunction”.
These are used by celebrities, politians and sports stars to prevent people even talking about the existence of a case, let alone revealing the facts of the case and the people involved.
However , due to the digital age, these were only of limited success, and only in relation to the print press.
Social media not only discussed the cases but revealed what the celebrities, politians and sports stars were so desperately trying to keep quiet.
These “Super Injunctions” laid bare the difference between social media and print media and just how much the current laws need to be updated in order to deal with modern digital developments.
The need to digitalize the legal profession has been embraced by the judicary and law makers and remains an evolving work in progress in the ever-developing digital age.
Can Help!
RoseLawMediaAndMore.TV 