Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Google LLC (Information Commissioner Intervening) decisions following a request by a data subject) was granted permission to
13 Apr 2018 [2018] WLR (D) 225, QBD intervene in the proceedings.
Facts: They sought orders for the removal of links on the basis that such
The two unrelated claims concerned the “right to be forgotten”, to information was old, out of date, irrelevant, of no public interest and/or
have personal information “delisted” or “de-indexed” by the operators of otherwise an illegitimate interference with their rights. The claim in the first
internet search engines (“ISEs”). case related to three links providing information about the claimant’s
The claimants were two businessmen who were convicted of conviction after a trial for conspiracy to account falsely, and the sentence
criminal offences many years ago. Both Claimants were granted anonymity imposed. The claimant in the second case complained of links to 11 source
(as ‘NT1’ and ‘NT2’ respectively) so as to avoid undermining the purpose of publications. He made one inaccuracy complaint, which related to an item in
their claims. The defendant, an American multinational technology company, a national newspaper. Both claimants sought compensation under the Data
operated a major ISE called “Search”. Protection Act 1998 and damages for misuse of private information.
In NT2’s case his Article 8 rights were engaged with the presence of a young
family a distinguishing feature. There was just enough in the realm of private
and family life to cross the threshold and require a justification. However
Google’s case on relevance concerning NT2 was very weak. Accordingly the
relevant factors weighed in favour of de-listing.
7. The question of damages did not arise in NT1’s case. In NT2’s case it
would be hard to say by reference to the terms of s 13(3) of the Data
Protection Act 1998 that Google had failed to take “such care as in all the
circumstances was reasonably required” to comply with the relevant
requirements. Accordingly, the Court issued a delisting order for Google to
remove the relevant data and search links related to NT2. As Google had
shown a commitment to complying with data protection requirements and
had taken reasonable care, no damages or compensation were awarded to
NT2.