Google Inc v Vidal-Hall & Ors [2015] EWCA Civ 311 (27 March 2015)

Google Inc v Vidal-Hall & Ors [2015] EWCA Civ 311 (27 March 2015)

Misuse of private information is to be recognised as a tort for the purposes of service out of the jurisdiction. Section 13 of the Data Protection Act 1998 must be interpreted so as to permit claims for compensation for distress alone, without the need to prove pecuniary loss, in order to comply with the requirements of Directive 95/46/EC. The claimants' browser-generated information is capable of being personal data under the DPA. There is a real and substantial cause of action for both misuse of private information and under the DPA.

Citation
[2015] EWCA Civ 311
Parties
Defendant/appellant: Google Inc.; Claimant/respondent: Judith Vidal-Hall; Claimant/respondent: Robert Hann; Claimant/respondent: Marc Bradshaw; Intervener: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in respect of the claims for misuse of private information and under the DPA; court affirms jurisdiction to try these claims.
Legal Topics
Misuse of Private Information, Breach of Confidence, Data Protection Act 1998, Jurisdiction, Compensation for Distress, Service Out of Jurisdiction
Privacy Law Data Protection Tort Law Civil Procedure Misuse of Private Information Breach of Confidence Data Protection Act 1998 Jurisdiction +2 more

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 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Google Inc.

Defendant/appellant

Judith Vidal-Hall

Claimant/respondent

Robert Hann

Claimant/respondent

Marc Bradshaw

Claimant/respondent

The Information Commissioner

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether misuse of private information is a tort for the purposes of CPR PD 6B para 3.1(9)
  2. 2 Whether compensation under section 13 of the Data Protection Act 1998 can be awarded for distress without pecuniary loss
  3. 3 Whether browser-generated information (BGI) is personal data under the DPA

Ratio Decidendi

Misuse of private information is to be recognised as a tort for the purposes of service out of the jurisdiction. Section 13 of the Data Protection Act 1998 must be interpreted so as to permit claims for compensation for distress alone, without the need to prove pecuniary loss, in order to comply with the requirements of Directive 95/46/EC. The claimants' browser-generated information is capable of being personal data under the DPA. There is a real and substantial cause of action for both misuse of private information and under the DPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in respect of the claims for misuse of private information and under the DPA; court affirms jurisdiction to try these claims.

Orders

  • Permission to serve out of the jurisdiction upheld for claims of misuse of private information and under the DPA.
  • Court has no jurisdiction to try claims for breach of confidence or for an injunction; those claims set aside.