PRIVACY, CONSTITUTIONS AND THE LAW OF TORTS: A COMPARATIVE AND THEORETICAL ANALYSIS OF PROTECTING PERSONAL INFORMATION AGAINST DISSEMINATION IN NEW ZEALAND, THE UK AND THE USA A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Law in the University of Canterbury by Martin Heite University of Canterbury 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... I ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................IV ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................V CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION .................................................................. 1 CHAPTER TWO - THE LAW OF THE USA .................................................... 11 1 Constitutional background of the speech-privacy conflict..............................................................13 1.1 Foundations of a constitutional ‘right to privacy’............................................................................13 1.2 First Amendment viability of the public disclosure of private facts ................................................17 1.2.1 Function and doctrinal framework of the First Amendment.....................................................18 1.2.2 Early implications for New Zealand and the UK......................................................................22 1.2.3 Constitutionalisation of private law ..........................................................................................25 1.2.4 Constitutional viability of the public disclosure tort.................................................................27 1.3 Brief excursion to ‘hate speech’ and ‘fighting words’.....................................................................37 1.4 Conclusion on the constitutional law...............................................................................................39 2 The public dissemination tort ............................................................................................................43 2.1 Elements of the tort according to the Restatement...........................................................................45 2.2 The gist of the action – common law or one-man-project?..............................................................47 2.3 The private facts test........................................................................................................................51 2.3.1 Adjudication technique .............................................................................................................53 2.3.2 Litigant’s right and court’s permission .....................................................................................59 2.3.2.1 The status of privacy and freedom of speech.....................................................................62 2.3.2.2 Ubi jus ibi remedium - the US ‘right to privacy’ from right to duty..................................66 2.3.2.3 Ubi remedium ibi jus - Duties in New Zealand, the UK and the USA ..............................75 Genuine duties and strict liability rules......................................................................................76 Genuine duties as a necessary precondition for privacy concepts .............................................83 2.3.2.4 Two versions of a reasonable expectation of privacy ........................................................84 2.3.3 Towards a right to a ‘right of privacy’......................................................................................91 2.3.3.1 Warren and Brandeis and the ‘inviolate personality’.........................................................93 2.3.3.2 Corrective and distributive justice .....................................................................................97 2.3.3.3 Right to privacy - a fresh start............................................................................................99 2.3.4 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................................106 2.4 Publicity and the impact of ‘special relationships’ ........................................................................108 2.5 The ‘highly offensive’ test – a recipe for confusion?.....................................................................114 2.5.1 Character and institutional context of the test.........................................................................116 2.5.1.1 Equality concerns.............................................................................................................119 2.5.1.2 Questionable inherent logic of the test.............................................................................123 2.5.1.3 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................125 2.5.2 The ‘highly offensive’ test in English law ..............................................................................126 2.6 The newsworthiness element .........................................................................................................134 2.6.1 The rejection of the tort in North Carolina..............................................................................134 i 2.6.2 The newsworthy element in Californian law ..........................................................................136 2.6.2.1 The pre-Shulman era........................................................................................................137 2.6.2.2 Newsworthiness according to Shulman v Group W ........................................................140 3 Conclusion on the American Law ...................................................................................................145 CHAPTER THREE - THE RIGHTS-FRAMEWORK OF THE UK .................. 150 1 Positive obligations under the European Convention of Human Rights......................................152 2 The horizontal effect of the Human Rights Act..............................................................................157 CHAPTER FOUR - THE LAW OF NEW ZEALAND...................................... 165 1 The privacy tort in New Zealand’s constitutional framework......................................................165 1.1 The Bill of Rights Act....................................................................................................................165 1.1.1 The horizontal effect of the NZBoRA ....................................................................................167 1.1.2 Privacy, freedom of speech and the NZBoRA........................................................................169 1.1.3 A horizontal effect in purely private litigation? ......................................................................173 1.1.1.1 The appropriate degree of the NZBoRA’s impact ...........................................................178 1.1.1.2 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................185 1.1.4 Justified limits of freedom of expression................................................................................187 1.1.4.1 Reasonable limit demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society ......................188 Definitional balancing..............................................................................................................195 Ad hoc balancing .....................................................................................................................199 The Duff approach ...................................................................................................................203 1.1.4.2 Balancing according to the joint judgment ......................................................................204 The three balancing exercises ..............................................................................................205 Remarks on definitional balancing and conclusion..............................................................212 1.1.4.3 The balancing exercise of Tipping J ................................................................................215 The two-step limitation process ...........................................................................................215 Privacy and freedom of speech in the balance .....................................................................220 Rights and limits in the balance ...........................................................................................222 1.1.5 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................................229 1.2 The preferable balancing exercise..................................................................................................231 1.2.1 Anticipated solution according to the joint judgment .............................................................233 1.2.2 Anticipated solution according to Tipping J ...........................................................................242 1.3 The public- concern element – defence or element of the tort? .....................................................247 1.3.1 The NZBoRA and public interest feature of the privacy tort..................................................249 1.3.2 The public interest feature of the traditional breach of confidence