- Published on
KembaraXtra—Case Law-X v Y (1988) - Breach of Confidence & Public Interest Core Principle: The public interest required to justify breaching confidentiality must be substantial. This case clarifies the balance between freedom of the press and the right to confidentiality, particularly concerning sensitive health information.
1. Facts of the Case:
1. Facts of the Case:
- A Health Authority employee leaked the names of two doctors being treated for AIDS to a newspaper.
- The Health Authority sought an injunction to prevent the newspaper from publishing the doctors' names and details.
- The court granted the injunction, preventing publication.
- Acknowledged the public interest in freedom of the press.
- Acknowledged some public interest in the information the newspaper sought to publish (doctors with AIDS).
- However, the court found that these public interests were substantially outweighed by:
- The public interest in loyalty and confidentiality generally.
- The public interest in the confidentiality of AIDS patients' hospital records specifically.
- The court believed preventing publication would have minimal negative impact on the public.
- This case establishes a high bar for the "public interest" defense in breach of confidence cases. It's not enough for the information to be merely "interesting" to the public.
- Referencing British Steel Corp v Granada Television Ltd (1981), Lord Wilberforce highlighted the distinction between what is "interesting to the public" and what is in the "public interest to make known".
0 Comments