Rugby Football Union v Viagogo Ltd: CA 20 Dec 2011

The Union complained that the defendant operators of a web-site had permitted the sale of its tickets at far above their face value. The Court considerer whether it was proper to make a Norwich Pharmacal order which would entail the disclosure of personal data contrary to the Data Protection Directive and the 1998 Act.
Held: It would generally be proportionate to make an order revealing the identity of arguable wrongdoers. Longmore LJ said that there could be no reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of data which reveal such arguable wrongs. The respondent’s own conditions of business pointed out to their customers that their may be circumstances in which their personal data will be passed on to others. The requirement of disclosure of a limited amount of personal data was proportionate because there was no other way in which arguable wrongdoing could be exposed: ‘In this case, as in many other Norwich Pharmacal cases, necessity and proportionality may go hand in hand’.
Longmore, Patten, Rafferty LJJ
[2011] EWCA Civ 1585
Bailii
Data Protection 1998 Act 1998
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromThe Rugby Football Union v Viagogo Ltd QBD 30-Mar-2011
The claimant objected to the resale through the defendant of tickets to matches held at the Twickenham Stadium. The tickets contained terms disallowing resales at prices over the face value. They sought orders for the disclosure of the names of the . .

Cited by:
CitedPatel v Unite The Union QBD 27-Jan-2012
patel_uniteCA2012
The claimant, wanting to bring defamation proceedings in respect of postings on the defendant’s internet forum, sought orders for disclosure of the identities of the posters. The defendants said that the forum having been taken down, they were now . .
Appeal fromThe Rugby Football Union v Consolidated Information Services Ltd SC 21-Nov-2012
The Union challenged the right of the respondent to resell tickets to international rugby matches. The tickets were subject to a condition rendering it void on any resale at above face value. They said that the respondent had advertised tickets in . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 March 2021; Ref: scu.450115