Bloomberg LP – Court Ruling (United Kingdom, 2022)

Court Ruling
DPA EWCA16 February 2022United Kingdom
final
Court Ruling

General GDPR enforcement action

This case relates to broader data protection obligations, not specifically to cookie or consent banner compliance. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.

Bloomberg published an article using confidential information from a legal request, despite warnings that it could harm ongoing investigations. The court later found that the article violated the individual's privacy rights. This case highlights the tension between privacy and freedom of expression in media reporting.

What happened

Bloomberg published an article containing sensitive information from a confidential legal document without proper consent.

Who was affected

The individual under investigation whose private information was disclosed in the article.

What the authority found

The court ruled that the publication violated the individual's reasonable expectation of privacy, despite initial decisions favoring freedom of expression.

Why this matters

This ruling emphasizes the need for media organizations to carefully balance privacy rights with the public's right to know. It serves as a precedent for future cases involving the publication of sensitive information.

National Law Articles

Article 8 ECHR
Decision AuthorityUKSC (UK)
Reviewed AuthorityEWCA (UK)
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The data subject (respondent) worked for a publicly listed company. The appellant is an international media organisation who obtained a confidential Letter of Request (LoR) sent by a UK law enforcement body (UKLEB) to a foreign state seeking legal assistance in criminal investigations against the data subject on corruption and conspiracy. The LoR contained confidential information about the UKLEB’s state of investigation on whether the data subject defrauded a publicly listed company. The appellant intended to publish an article with sensitive information from the LoR about the data subject's work for the company, the status of the criminal investigation and who and what were the targets of the UKLEB investigation. Before the publication, the appellant contacted the UKLEB and the data subject’s solicitor to inform them about their intentions. The UKLEB expressed concerns that the publication could seriously harm the investigations and advised the appellant not to proceed with the publication. The appellant ignored the warnings, and the article was published in 2016. Subsequently, the data subject was denied an interim injunction to prevent further publication on the grounds that the data subject’s right to privacy under Article 8 ECHR was outweighed by the appellant’s right to freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR. The trial court later established that the factual basis for this decision was wrong, and the injunction should have been granted. At trial, the data subject claimed to have a reasonable expectation of privacy in information published in the Article and that the media organisation misused their private information by publishing the article. Applying the two-stage test summarised by Buxton LJ in McKennitt v Ash [2008] QB 73 (CA) to determine whether (1) the data subject has a reasonable expectation of privacy and (2) that expectation is outweighed by public interest, the trial court found that “there was a very clear public interest that the contents

Outcome

Court Ruling

A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Bloomberg LP in UK

This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.

Details

Ruling Date

16 February 2022

Authority

DPA EWCA

About this data

Data: GDPRhub (noyb.eu)
Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
AI-verified and classified

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Bloomberg LP - United Kingdom (2022). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: