« Police search warrants against the media | Main | New draft broadcasting code for TV »
Law Commission paper on privacy
By Steven | March 9, 2009
The Law Commission has released yet another paper on privacy. “These are big issues and they are hard,” says Commission president Sir Geoffrey Palmer. 300 pages big and hard, in fact, building on 2008’s 222-page paper “Privacy: concepts and issues” (discussed here), 2007’s 76-page “A conceptual approach to privacy” by Mark Hickford, and that’s not counting the Commission’s ongoing work on the Privacy Act and public registers. It seems the issues are getting bigger and harder by the year. Methinks the Commission better hurry up and resolve these issues before they become so big and hard that they are intractable.
Here are the key issues, according to the Commission’s press release:
- Is there a value in a tort of invasion of privacy by publicity given to private facts? If so, should it be left to the common law?
- Are any new criminal offences needed to deal with specific types of intrusion?
- Should there be a tort of intrusion into a person’s seclusion? If so, should its development be left to the common law or should it be introduced by statute?
- Should closed circuit television surveillance be regulated?
- Should there be any civil or criminal liability for certain uses of surveillance devices when they are used outside the law enforcement arena?
- Are any reforms to the law needed to deal with voyeurism not involving the use of recording devices, including reform of the “peeping and peering” offence?
- Should the media be subject to any greater or lesser legal restrictions concerning privacy intrusions than other members of the public?
The Commission is seeking feedback by 29 May.
Topics: Privacy tort | 48 Comments »
48 Responses to “Law Commission paper on privacy”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
March 9th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Should there be a tort of intrusion into a person’s seclusion? If so, should its development be left to the common law or should it be introduced by statute?
An odd question … what if the conclusion is that there emphatically should be a tort of intrusion into a person’s seclusion, but that its development should be left to the common law … and then a court decides there shouldn’t be one?
May 25th, 2020 at 4:27 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Here you will find 21852 additional Information on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
June 27th, 2020 at 10:57 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Information on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
July 5th, 2020 at 3:56 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Info here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
July 6th, 2020 at 7:47 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
July 20th, 2020 at 2:11 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
August 19th, 2020 at 7:57 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
August 20th, 2020 at 7:17 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Information on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
September 1st, 2020 at 4:23 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Information on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
September 19th, 2020 at 9:10 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
September 22nd, 2020 at 8:48 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Information here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
September 26th, 2020 at 9:29 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] There you can find 49404 more Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
October 1st, 2020 at 4:52 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Information here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
November 5th, 2020 at 4:47 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Information on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
November 5th, 2020 at 4:23 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Information here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
November 6th, 2020 at 12:53 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] There you will find 78012 additional Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
November 8th, 2020 at 6:58 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
November 9th, 2020 at 1:21 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Information to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
November 17th, 2020 at 1:33 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] There you will find 83050 additional Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
November 17th, 2020 at 2:05 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
December 8th, 2020 at 1:05 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
December 9th, 2020 at 4:13 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
December 12th, 2020 at 8:18 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
December 25th, 2020 at 3:28 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Here you will find 85160 more Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
December 26th, 2020 at 1:01 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
January 3rd, 2021 at 8:35 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Information here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
January 5th, 2021 at 5:41 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Information here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
January 6th, 2021 at 6:13 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Information to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
January 7th, 2021 at 12:35 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
February 15th, 2021 at 9:56 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Information here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
February 16th, 2021 at 12:52 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Info here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
February 20th, 2021 at 1:30 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
March 9th, 2021 at 11:48 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
March 24th, 2021 at 12:17 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
March 25th, 2021 at 12:27 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
April 24th, 2021 at 8:37 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
May 8th, 2021 at 1:20 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
June 27th, 2021 at 12:32 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] There you can find 35525 more Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
June 29th, 2021 at 7:33 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Information on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
July 3rd, 2021 at 2:16 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
July 3rd, 2021 at 8:17 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Information here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
July 24th, 2021 at 2:39 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
August 5th, 2021 at 6:39 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
August 20th, 2021 at 1:40 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
October 16th, 2021 at 5:27 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Info here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
October 16th, 2021 at 1:02 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
October 20th, 2021 at 2:59 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Information here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]
October 27th, 2021 at 12:27 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=225 […]