Lecture notes
NCTJ Law and regulation confidence notes
- Module
- Journalism
- Institution
- University Of Lincoln (UoL)
Lecture notes on NCTJ exam content for media law and regulation
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
Content preview
Law, ethics and regulationLecture 5
Confidence and confidentiality
UK does not have law of privacy
In a privacy case a judge will be looking to decide whether the claimant had REOP.
Can depend on nature of what happened, where it happened, who it happened to and
whether it is well publicised.
Public interest can be a defence.
Privacy law has evolved to protect people who are under investigation by the police or
official agency.
A media organisation or journalist who publishes a report identifying a person as being
under investigation could be sued for damages for misuse of private information if that
person is not charged with any offence.
Eg, if they’ve been searched or questioned
The person could seek an injunction.
Eg, Sir Cliff Richard and the BBC.
Case law is not clear yet on wether privacy law protects a person as regards publication of
an arrest.
If it was visible to the public, it is less likely to be ruled to intrude as there would be no REOP
unless there was an exceptional factor – arrested or mentally ill.
If police released identity for a legitimate purpose – that can be published safely.
Breach of confidence
A person given confidence should not take unfair advantage of it.
Breach of confidence is a civil matter – a tort
Cases are heard in county courts or the Queens bench division of the high court.
Risks – watch out for these in scenarios:
- Revealing commercial secrets
- Information gained in employment – protect commercially sensitive information eg,
market research , data/plans for new products
- Passing on details to a competitor could result in being sacked and being sued for
breach of confidence
- Competitor could also be sued if it is clear the information is of a confidential nature.
- Health details – hospitals
- Private details – families and relationships
- Key cases :
- Prince Albert v Strange (1848)- publication of private family etchings, Coco v AN
Clark (engineers)- mergarry test (moped design), A-G v Times Newspapers (1992)-
spycatcher case, Goodwin v UK (1996)- revealing a source, Cmpbell v Mirror Group
Newspapers (2004)- NA.
Three elements – MERGARRY TEST
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller hannahreeder1. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £9.19. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
67474 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now