Harassment of terrorism victims

[reposted from LinkedIn]

It is impossible to imagine claimants with whom one has more sympathy than Martin Hibbert and his daughter Eve, who each suffered grave, life-changing injuries in the 2017 Manchester Arena attack, and who then found themselves targeted by the bizarre and ghoulish actions of Richard Hall, a “conspiracy theorist” who has claimed the attack was in fact a hoax.

Martin and Eve brought claims in harassment and data protection against Hall, and, in a typically meticulous judgment Mrs Justice Steyn DBE yesterday gave judgment comprehensively in their favour on liability in the harassment claim. Further submissions are now invited on remedies.

The data protection claim probably adds nothing, but for those pleading and defending such claims it is worth reading Steyn J’s (mild) criticisms of the flaws, on both sides, at paragraphs 246-261. She has also invited further submissions on the data protection claim, although one wonders if it will be pursued.

Other than that, though, one hopes this case consigns Hall to the dustbin of history.

The views in this post (and indeed most posts on this blog) are my personal ones, and do not represent the views of any organisation I am involved with.

Leave a comment

Filed under Data Protection, judgments, UK GDPR

Leave a comment