Mosley V. Newsgroup Newspapers Notes
This is a sample of our (approximately) 3 page long Mosley V. Newsgroup Newspapers notes, which we sell as part of the Commercial Remedies BCL Notes collection, a Distinction package written at Oxford in 2013 that contains (approximately) 523 pages of notes across 153 different documents.
The original file is a 'Word (Docx)' whilst this sample is a 'PDF' representation of said file. This means that the formatting here may have errors. The original document you'll receive on purchase should have more polished formatting.
Mosley V. Newsgroup Newspapers Revision
The following is a plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Commercial Remedies BCL Notes. This text version has had its formatting removed so pay attention to its contents alone rather than its presentation. The version you download will have its original formatting intact and so will be much prettier to look at.
MOSLEY V. NEWS GROUP NEWSPAPERS Should exemplary damages be awarded for breach of privacy/confidence? (Breach of ECHR) I nevertheless indicated that in the light of the authorities my provisional view was that the plea should be disallowed in the context of a claim founded on privacy and/or breach of confidence. The cause of action now commonly described as infringement or breach of privacy, involving the balancing of competing Convention rights, usually those embodied in Arts 8 and 10, has recently evolved from the equitable doctrines that traditionally governed the protection of confidential information. Now (and especially since the formulation by Lord Nicholls in Campbell) it is common to speak of the protection of personal information in this context, without importing the customary indicia of a duty of confidence. The question arises whether it may now be correct to apply the label of "tort" to this expanded cause of action. I was referred to some authorities which would certainly suggest not. Meanwhile, in order to come to a decision myself, I have to address the authorities as they stand. There is certainly no English authority which establishes that exemplary damages are recoverable in the context of this newly developed form of action. In the absence of any positive decision, it would involve something of a departure for a judge now to hold that such damages are indeed available on the list of remedies for infringement of privacy. Such an extension would require to be based presumably upon an analogy to be drawn with existing categories of case where such damages have been awarded. Kuddus does not justify an unlimited expansion of exemplary damages: Much attention was focused by Counsel upon the decision by the House of Lords in Kuddus to the effect that it is not appropriate to limit the application of exemplary damages purely by reference to what was called the "cause of action test"; that is to say, merely by reference to those torts in respect of which it could be established that there had been an award of exemplary damages prior to 1964 (i.e. when Rookes v Barnard was decided). Accordingly, in Kuddus itself, it was held that it had been inappropriate to strike out the claim for exemplary damages simply on the basis that it related to the newly developed (or newly discovered) tort of misfeasance in public office. I believe it to be significant that their Lordships' remarks were confined to categories of tort. It is not suggested either by Lord Scott or by any of his brethren that the potential extension he recognised (while regretting it) would go so far as to embrace breach of confidence or any other equitable or restitutionary claim.
****************************End Of Sample*****************************
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Commercial Remedies BCL Notes.