Balancing clinician’s privacy rights with public disclosure; getting the balance right: Abbasi v Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust; Haastrup v King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Rebecca Gladwin-Geoghegan, Steve Foster

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

A recent decision of the Court of Appeal involved the continuing problem of balancing a person’s right to freedom of expression (protected by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights) with the right to private life (contained in Article 8) in the context of medical treatment. This balancing exercise must be carried out without providing ‘trump’ status to one particular right, although information relating to medical privacy rights has been given special protection by the domestic courts. In general, therefore, the courts must weigh the respective interests and claims in the specific case, applying the principles of necessity and proportionality to the facts and deciding whose rights are stronger in where the balance lie; including any balance of convenience when considering interim remedies
Original languageEnglish
Article number7
Pages (from-to)87-96
Number of pages10
JournalCoventry Law Journal
Volume28
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2023

Keywords

  • free speech
  • medical law
  • practtioners

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Balancing clinician’s privacy rights with public disclosure; getting the balance right: Abbasi v Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust; Haastrup v King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this