Savage -v- Data Protection Commissioner & anor [2018] IEHC 122 (09 February 2018)

Savage -v- Data Protection Commissioner & anor [2018] IEHC 122 (09 February 2018)

The High Court finds that the Circuit Court erred in law by evaluating the URL title in isolation, misidentifying opinion as fact, failing to properly apply the balancing test required by Google Spain, and not applying the correct standard of review as set out in Orange Communications. The Circuit Court's order directing the Commissioner to issue an enforcement notice was outside its jurisdiction.

Citation
[2018] IEHC 122
Parties
Respondent/appellant: Mark Savage; First Appellant/respondent: Data Protection Commissioner; Second Appellant/notice Party: Google Ireland Limited
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
09 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Statutory Appeal / High Court Appeal on Point of Law
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Circuit Court decision set aside.
Legal Topics
Accuracy of Personal Data, Right to Be Forgotten, Search Engine Liability, Public Figure Status, Balancing of Rights, Curial Deference, Statutory Appeals
Data Protection Privacy Administrative Law Accuracy of Personal Data Right to Be Forgotten Search Engine Liability Public Figure Status Balancing of 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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Savage

Respondent/appellant

Data Protection Commissioner

First Appellant/respondent

Google Ireland Limited

Second Appellant/notice Party

Procedural Posture

Statutory Appeal / High Court Appeal on Point of Law

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Circuit Court erred in law in its interpretation and application of the Data Protection Acts and relevant EU jurisprudence
  2. 2 Whether the URL title constitutes inaccurate data or opinion
  3. 3 Whether the Circuit Court properly balanced the competing interests as required by Google Spain decision

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court finds that the Circuit Court erred in law by evaluating the URL title in isolation, misidentifying opinion as fact, failing to properly apply the balancing test required by Google Spain, and not applying the correct standard of review as set out in Orange Communications. The Circuit Court's order directing the Commissioner to issue an enforcement notice was outside its jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Circuit Court decision set aside.

Orders

  • Order of the Circuit Court directing the Commissioner to issue an enforcement notice is quashed.
  • Matter remitted to the Data Protection Commissioner for reconsideration in accordance with law.