References: [2004] NZCA 34, [2005] 1 NZLR 1, (2004) 7 HRNZ 301
Links: Worldlii
Coram: Gault P, Keith J, Blanchard J, Tipping J, Anderson J
(Court of Appeal of New Zealand) A photographer was commissioned to take photographs of the children of a well known television personality. He took pictures of Mr Hosking’s eighteen month old twins being pushed down a street by their mother. Mr and Mrs Hosking sought injunctions to prevent publication of the photograph relying on a cause of action for breach of confidence and for breach of privacy.
Held: The court identified two distinct versions of the tort of breach of confidence in English law: ‘One is the long-standing cause of action under which remedies are available in respect of use or disclosure where the information has been communicated in confidence. Subject to possible ‘trivia’ exceptions and to public interest (iniquity) defences, those remedies are available irrespective of the ‘offensiveness’ of the disclosure. The second gives a right of action in respect of publication of personal information of which the subject has a reasonable expectation of privacy irrespective of any burden of confidence.’
The taking of photographs in a public street must be taken to be one of the ordinary incidents of living in a free community, and there was no cause of action in tort for breach of privacy based upon the publication of photographs taken in a public place and the action for breach of confidence required there to be established a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of matters whose publication would be considered highly offensive to an objective reasonable person.
This case cites:
- Applied – Australian Broadcasting Corporation -v- Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd ([2001] HCA 63, Austlii, 208 CLR 199, [2001] 185 ALR 1, 76 ALJR 1)
(High Court of Australia) The activities of a company which processed possum meat for export (‘what the processing of possums looks,and sounds like’) were not such as to attract the quality of being confidential for the purpose of the law protecting . .
(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:
- Criticised – Associated Newspapers Ltd -v- Prince of Wales CA (Bailii, [2006] EWCA Civ 1776, Times 28-Dec-06, [2008] EMLR 4, (2007) 104 LSG 30, [2007] Info TLR 267, [2008] Ch 57, [2007] 2 All ER 139, [2007] 3 WLR 222, [2008] EMLR 121)
The defendant newspaper appealed summary judgment against it for breach of confidence and copyright inringement having published the claimant’s journals which he said were private.
Held: The judge had given insufficient weight to the fact that . . - Cited – Murray -v- Express Newspapers Plc and Another ChD (Bailii, [2007] EWHC 1908 (Ch), Times 04-Oct-07, [2008] 1 WLR 2846)
The claimant, now aged four and the son of a famous author, was photographed by use of a long lens, but in a public street. He now sought removal of the photograph from the defendant’s catalogue, and damages for breach of confidence.
Held: The . . - Cited – Murray -v- Big Pictures (UK) Ltd; Murray -v- Express Newspapers CA (Bailii, [2008] EWCA Civ 446, [2008] 3 WLR 1360, [2008] HRLR 33, [2008] UKHRR 736, [2008] 2 FLR 599, [2008] 3 FCR 661, [2008] ECDR 12, [2008] EMLR 1, [2008] Fam Law 732, [2009] Ch 481)
The claimant, a famous writer, complained on behalf of her infant son that he had been photographed in a public street with her, and that the photograph had later been published in a national newspaper. She appealed an order striking out her claim . .
(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 29-Nov-15 Ref: 247606