Injunction refused: ECHR article 8 rights to privacy yield to public interest considerations

In Long Beach Limited and Denis Christel Sassou Nguesso v Global Witness Limited [2007] EWHC 1980 (QB), the court had to balance the claimants' rights to privacy under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) against the rights of the defendant to freedom of expression under article 10 ECHR.

Burton J refused the claimants' application for an injunction requiring the defendant, a global anti-corruption NGO, to remove from its website information and documents relating to the claimants' affairs, obtained as a result of proceedings in Hong Kong between different parties. The documents in question concerned alleged corruption on the part of the son of the President of the Republic of Congo and related directly to serious concerns about the sincerity of the Congo in undertaking reforms in return for debt relief. As regards the parties' competing rights under the ECHR, there was a clear and overwhelming case for refusing the injunction on the ground that there was an important public interest in the publication of the documents. It was unlikely that the claimants' article 8 rights, their right to privacy or any remaining confidentiality could override the defendant's right to freedom of expression under article 10 and the public interest in publication.

The judge also concluded that the defendant was not bound by orders made by the Hong Kong court. Moreover, there had been sufficient reference to the documents in open court in the Hong Kong proceedings so as to remove their confidential status.

The weight of the public interest evidence in this case was significant and demonstrates that the court will be prepared, in appropriate cases, to find that the right to privacy and confidentiality may have to yield to those considerations.