Sube & Anor v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor (Rev 1) [2020] EWHC 1125 (QB) (07 May 2020)

Sube & Anor v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor (Rev 1) [2020] EWHC 1125 (QB) (07 May 2020)

The claimants failed to establish that the defendants' conduct, consisting of publication of articles and reader comments, amounted to harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The conduct did not cross the threshold of oppressive and unreasonable behaviour required for civil liability, nor did it constitute an abuse of media freedom. The claims under the Data Protection Act 1998, s 10, were premature or had been satisfied by the defendants' removal of the relevant data, and no remedy under s 10(4) was warranted.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 1125
Parties
Claimant: Arnold Mballe Sube; Claimant: Jeanne Mballe Sube; First Defendant: News Group Newspapers Limited; Second Defendant: Express Newspapers
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim for Harassment and Data Protection Remedies / Post Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Harassment by Publication, Data Processing, Freedom of Expression, Privacy, Sensitive Personal Data
Media Law Data Protection Tort Law Harassment by Publication Data Processing Freedom of Expression Privacy Sensitive Personal Data

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arnold Mballe Sube

Claimant

Jeanne Mballe Sube

Claimant

News Group Newspapers Limited

First Defendant

Express Newspapers

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim for Harassment and Data Protection Remedies / Post Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether publication of articles and reader comments amounted to harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997
  2. 2 Whether the defendants' processing of reader comments breached the Data Protection Act 1998, s 10
  3. 3 Whether the conduct was reasonable in the circumstances under PHA s 1(3)(c)

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to establish that the defendants' conduct, consisting of publication of articles and reader comments, amounted to harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The conduct did not cross the threshold of oppressive and unreasonable behaviour required for civil liability, nor did it constitute an abuse of media freedom. The claims under the Data Protection Act 1998, s 10, were premature or had been satisfied by the defendants' removal of the relevant data, and no remedy under s 10(4) was warranted.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed