View all newsletters
Sign up for our free email newsletters

Fighting for quality news media in the digital age.

  1. Comment
February 13, 2012

Some good news for journalists from the European Court of Human Rights

By Cleland Thom

Legal experts are waiting to see what effect a privacy ruling in Germany last week has on English courts.

The ruling – the second in eight years involving Princess Caroline of Monaco – favoured the media, at a time when privacy law in the UK is under serious scrutiny at the Leveson inquiry.

The European Court of Human Rights dismissed the Princess’ claim that publication of a photo of her and her husband on holiday in Switzerland in 2002 breached their rights to privacy under the ECHR.

The photo was used with an article discussing the poor health of the Princess’ father, Prince Rainer.

German courts had previously banned its publication. But ECHR judges in Strasbourg ruled that it illustrated a subject of “general interest” – a slightly different term than “public interest”, which we have become accustomed to.

The judgment noted that the photo was taken in a public place and that Princess Caroline and her husband could not be classed as private individuals.

It said there was a fundamental distinction between reporting facts about private individuals and facts that contributed to a debate about public figures.

The ruling will be noted by the Parliamentary Committee on Privacy and Injunctions, which is examining as striking a blow in favour of freedom of expression.

Equally significant was another decision by the ECHR last week,  to overturn an injunction preventing the German tabloid Das Bild publishing articles about an unnamed TV star who had been publicly arrested for possessing drugs at a German beer festival.

The court said the injunction breached the paper’s right to freedom of expression on a matter of public interest.

Claas-Hendrik Soehring, head of legal affairs at Axel Springer Verlag AG, said in a statement: ‘As a celebrity you cannot on one hand seek public attention – for example when it is about enhancing your career through the media – and then on the other hand, once there are judicial proceedings, seek to have all coverage forbidden.”

The cases, taken with Max Mosley’s failed attempt to force newspapers to warn people before exposing their private lives, provide some welcome good news for the media.

Cleland Thom is a consultant and trainer in media law

Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our "Letters Page" blog

Select and enter your email address Weekly insight into the big strategic issues affecting the future of the news industry. Essential reading for media leaders every Thursday. Your morning brew of news about the world of news from Press Gazette and elsewhere in the media. Sent at around 10am UK time. Our weekly dose of strategic insight about the future of news media aimed at US readers. A fortnightly update from the front-line of news and advertising. Aimed at marketers and those involved in the advertising industry.
  • Business owner/co-owner
  • CEO
  • COO
  • CFO
  • CTO
  • Chairperson
  • Non-Exec Director
  • Other C-Suite
  • Managing Director
  • President/Partner
  • Senior Executive/SVP or Corporate VP or equivalent
  • Director or equivalent
  • Group or Senior Manager
  • Head of Department/Function
  • Manager
  • Non-manager
  • Retired
  • Other
Visit our privacy Policy for more information about our services, how Progressive Media Investments may use, process and share your personal data, including information on your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications.
Thank you

Thanks for subscribing.

Websites in our network