The Associated Press has highlighted, in a long-read, a legal case which looks to challenge the protection of internet platforms under s.230 of the Communications Decency Act. The Supreme Court case concerns liability for YouTube suggestions which are argued helped the Islamic State recruit. The case is brought by the family of Nohemi Gonzalez who tragically lost her life in a terrorist attack in Paris. The case is due to be heard on Tuesday 21 February. See here for the article and for more details see the SCOTUS blog. “Issue: Whether Section 230(c)(1) of the Communications Decency Act immun ..read more

MI5 admitted that personal data had been unlawfully processed and retained between the period of 2016 and 2019 due to failures in retention, review and destruction practicies. See pg.79 of the open judgment for a summary of the failings of MI5 in their handling of personal data in particular. For further, more detailed, context regarding the case see the Privacy International press release ..read more

This case is illustrative of a set of facts where the legitimate starting point of a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of a criminal investigation at pre-charge stage under English law can be can be departed from: Whilst a reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to a police investigation is the starting point, on the particular and somewhat special facts of this case, I am unable to conclude that by June 2019 such an expectation subsisted in relation to the information that the CPS were considering a charging decision in relation to the Claimant. at p.147, Knowles J ..read more

Welcome to Privacy Law in Practice, our series at TPP demystifying what it is like to practice in privacy law. Have you ever wondered which data protection law issues come up in practice? It obviously depends on the industry and area you work in, but data protection law might be more prevalent than you think. Read more: Privacy Law in Practice – An Insight into Data Protection Law as an In-House IT Lawyer – Madeleine Weber I completed an English LLB law degree in 2016, and an LLM in 2017. Back then, there were few options to study data protection law modules. Little did we know that data prote ..read more

Inforrm covered a wide range of data protection and privacy cases in 2022. Following my posts in 2018, 2019,  2020 and 2021 here is my selection of notable privacy and data protection cases across 2022. ZXC v Bloomberg [2022] UKSC 5 This was the seminal privacy case of the year, decided by the UK Supreme Court. It was considered whether, in general a person under criminal investigation has, prior to being charged, a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of information relating to that investigation. The case concerned ZXC, a regional CEO of a PL ..read more

Inforrm reported on a large number of defamation cases from around the world in 2022.  Following my widely read posts on 2017,  2018,  2019, 2020 and 2021 defamation cases, this is my personal selection of the most legally and factually interesting cases from England, Australia and Canada from the past year. Vardy v. Rooney [2022] EWHC 2017 (QB) An interim hearing in this case featured at number five in my 2021 list.  We now have the final judgment in the “Wagatha Christie” case between Rebekah Vardy and Coleen Rooney as number ..read more

We would like to thank all our readers and subscribers for visiting TPP over the past year. Many thanks also to our contributors across the past year for their insight and expertise. We are currently working on getting more informative pieces on privacy to you- including a series on what privacy law is like to practice as a professional (if you would like to contribute be sure to let us know) and our traditional Top 10 cases of the year across defamation, privacy law and data protection in association with the esteemed International Forum for Responsible Media Blog. In the meantime, if any of ..read more

PART VI: UPDATES Any commentary upon legislation in progress risks rapidly becoming outdated: an occupational hazard to which this piece is by no means immune. Ahead of the OSB’s return to Parliament, the Government issued a press release on 28 November 2022 noting a number of important developments to the amended Bill. Recalling many of the issues highlighted in Parts I – V of this commentary, the principal changes include:  Most significantly, the removal of the ‘legal but harmful’ provisions from the Bill. Adult safety duties seen as incentivising the over-removal of legal (if potentially ..read more

PART III: CRITICISM In a rare show of national unity, disapproval of the OSB has spanned both ends of the political spectrum. Alongside criticism from the Labour culture minister, Conservative politicians have also weighed in on the ‘legal but harmful’ debate. Thinktanks and non-profit groups have likewise been apprehensive. Perhaps most headline-grabbing was the censure of the former Supreme Court judge, Lord Sumption, who denounced the OSB in an article in The Spectator, and subsequently on the Law Pod UK podcast. From this range of commentary, five common criticisms may be collated: (1) The ..read more

A number of Bills proposed by the recent Conservative governments have sparked controversy among commentators: among them, the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, the Retained EU Law Bill, and the ‘British’ Bill of Rights Bill. Taking its place in the rogues’ gallery is the Online Safety Bill (OSB). Now returning to the House of Commons on 5 December 2022 to finish its Report Stage, the OSB has come some way since the ‘Online Harms’ White Paper published in April 2019. The Bill raises important questions about freedom of expression, online speech regulation and government (over)reach. This article ..read more