Key Facts
- •Ms C pleaded guilty to 9 counts of fraud in 2015.
- •Mr Palmer, a freelance journalist, published a report of Ms C's court hearing on his blog.
- •Ms C claimed misuse of private information, harassment, and breaches of data protection laws.
- •Mr Palmer claimed he attended the hearing, took notes and photos, and his report was accurate.
- •The court found Mr Palmer's evidence more credible and his report to be accurate.
- •Ms C's convictions became spent in 2017.
- •The blog post was taken down and reposted several times over the years.
- •The court considered Ms C's claims of distress to be irrational and unforeseeable.
Legal Principles
Misuse of private information
None explicitly stated, but implied through case law and discussion of Article 8 ECHR
Harassment under Protection from Harassment Act 1997
Protection from Harassment Act 1997, sections 1 and 3
Data Protection Act 1998 & 2018, GDPR
Data Protection Act 1998, Data Protection Act 2018, GDPR (EU) 2016/679
Right to be forgotten (Article 17 GDPR)
GDPR (EU) 2016/679, Article 17
Article 8 ECHR (right to respect for private and family life)
European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8
Article 10 ECHR (freedom of speech and expression)
European Convention on Human Rights, Article 10
Outcomes
All claims dismissed
The blog post was an accurate report of a public hearing; Ms C had no reasonable expectation of privacy; the publication was in the public interest and outweighed Ms C's privacy concerns; the alleged harassment was not a course of conduct; data protection laws were not breached; and the 'right to be forgotten' was not applicable in the circumstances.