Category Archives: Defamation and Privacy
‘Gambling with Consent: Free, Specific, and Informed Consent in Data Protection Law’
BACKGROUND In RTM v Bonne Terre Ltd [2025] EWHC 111 (KB), the High Court considered claims brought in data protection and the tort of misuse of private information. The Claimant described himself as a ‘recovering online gambling addict’ [1]. He sought damages for harm, distress and financial loss, and a declaration that his rights under […]
Lui, Lamb and Durodola, ‘A right to explanation for algorithmic credit decisions in the UK’
ABSTRACT This article argues for a statutory right to explanation in automated credit decision-making in the UK, as transparency and accountability are central to the rule of law. First, from a moral standpoint, we demonstrate that there is a double level of distrust in financial services and algorithms. Algorithms are unpredictable and can make unreliable […]
Ajunwa and Briscoe, ‘Genetic Privacy’
ABSTRACT The last decade has brought many technological advances to genetic testing. Increasingly, genetic testing, which was previously reserved for clinical or medical settings, has made its way to other spaces. Most significantly, we are now seeing the re-introduction of genetic testing to the workplace. Although the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), which became law […]
Ajunwa and Kamer, ‘Data Privacy by Contract’
ABSTRACT Protecting consumer privacy rights presents a particular challenge given the prevalence of data breaches. This Article notes that current law is woefully inadequate in protecting the privacy rights of consumers. Notably, the law fails in the following four areas: (1) classification of consumer data, (2) lack of a comprehensive approach, (3) after-the-fact focus, and […]
Daniel Solove, ‘Artificial Intelligence and Privacy’
This Article aims to establish a foundational understanding of the intersection between artificial intelligence (AI) and privacy, outlining the current problems AI poses to privacy and suggesting potential directions for the law’s evolution in this area. Thus far, few commentators have explored the overall landscape of how AI and privacy interrelate. This Article seeks to […]
Santos, Morozovaite and De Conca, ‘No harm no foul: how harms caused by dark patterns are conceptualised and tackled under EU data protection, consumer and competition laws’
ABSTRACT Although several Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) studies have empirically investigated the harms caused by dark patterns, with policymakers and regulators regarding these harms significant, they have yet to be examined from a legal perspective. This paper identifies the individual, collective, material and non-material harms deriving from dark patterns, dissecting the role that harms play in […]
Gordon Hull, ‘Translating Privacy for Data Subjects’
ABSTRACT This essay offers a theoretical account of one reason that current privacy regulation fails. I argue that existing privacy laws inherit a focus on judicial subjects, using language about torts and abstract rights. Current threats to privacy, on the other hand, presuppose statistically-generated populations and aggregative models of subjectivity. This gap in underlying presupposition […]
Elena Sebyakina, ‘Privacy Legal Relationships’
ABSTRACT This work is aimed at initiating of discussion on general theory of privacy law. This article suggests beginning with classification of legal relationships arising in privacy sphere, as a first step toward identifying the flaws in privacy rulemaking and law application. The relational theory of law, underlying this work, explains why each privacy legal […]
Róisín Costello, ‘The Test in Kelly v Hennessy and Article 82(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation’
ABSTRACT In this article, I examine the test for recovery of non-material damages in Irish law. I argue that the existing tortious test for the recovery of such damages, established in Kelly v Hennessy, is applicable to such claims. However, it is also argued that several recent decisions have failed to engage, or engage fully, […]
Michael Birnhack, ‘In Defense of Privacy-as-Control (Properly Understood)’
ABSTRACT Privacy-as-control (‘PaC’) is one of the dominant conceptions of privacy. PaC means that each person should be able to decide for themselves whether to disclose personal data to another person, company, or the state, when, how, and under which conditions. PaC is translated into operational mechanisms, namely Fair Information practices (FIPs). In practice, we […]