Edward Craven writes:
In the increasingly heated debate about the state of English privacy law, the courts have frequently been accused of seeking to introduce a privacy law ‘by the back door’. The decision in CTB v News Group Newspapers  contains a robust judicial response to that criticism.
In his judgment, Mr Justice Eady – the judge who has so far borne the brunt of the media’s ire – tackles head on the suggestion that the judges are overriding the democratic process by unilaterally creating a new privacy law. The judgment also touches on another important and controversial issue, namely the circumstances in which an injunction should be refused or restricted on the basis that the private material has already entered the public domain.
Read more on LegalWeek.com.
What if this were not about media/press or payment for a story? When all is said and done, will these cases eventually come down to whether the courts can prevent someone from truthfully sharing or discussing their own life to protect the privacy of someone else’s life? If so, how do we balance those conflicting rights? Should any court be able to tell you that you cannot reveal or discuss something that happened in your life?