Stunt v Associated Newspapers Ltd

Stunt v Associated Newspapers Ltd

By majority, section 32(4) of the Data Protection Act 1998, when given a purposive and restricted interpretation, does not contravene Directive 95/46/EC or the Charter. The stay on proceedings applies only pre-publication and is a proportionate measure within the margin of appreciation afforded to Member States. However, the court is divided, and the issue is not acte clair; a reference to the CJEU is necessary for a preliminary ruling.

Parties
Appellant: James Stunt; Respondent: Associated Newspapers Limited; Intervener: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Reference to the CJEU for preliminary ruling; no final determination on compatibility of section 32(4) with the Directive pending CJEU decision.
Legal Topics
Section 32(4) Data Protection Act 1998, Freedom of Expression, Right to Privacy, EU Directive 95/46/ec, Charter of Fundamental Rights, Judicial Remedies, Journalistic Exemptions
Data Protection Media Law Human Rights Section 32(4) Data Protection Act 1998 Freedom of Expression Right to Privacy EU Directive 95/46/ec Charter of Fundamental Rights +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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Stunt

Appellant

Associated Newspapers Limited

Respondent

The Information Commissioner

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper interpretation of section 32(4) of the Data Protection Act 1998
  2. 2 Compatibility of section 32(4) with Directive 95/46/EC and the Charter of Fundamental Rights
  3. 3 Whether section 32(4) is incompatible with the right to an effective judicial remedy under EU law

Ratio Decidendi

By majority, section 32(4) of the Data Protection Act 1998, when given a purposive and restricted interpretation, does not contravene Directive 95/46/EC or the Charter. The stay on proceedings applies only pre-publication and is a proportionate measure within the margin of appreciation afforded to Member States. However, the court is divided, and the issue is not acte clair; a reference to the CJEU is necessary for a preliminary ruling.

Court Disposition

Reference to the CJEU for preliminary ruling; no final determination on compatibility of section 32(4) with the Directive pending CJEU decision.

Orders

  • Parties to make further submissions on the form and content of the reference to the CJEU.