The High Court - 2021 IEHC 287: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 13:01, 17 August 2021

The High Court - 2021 IEHC 287

Court:	High Court (Ireland)
Jurisdiction:	Ireland
Relevant Law:	Article 6(1)(c) GDPR Article 23 GDPR Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Decided:	19.05.2021
Published:
Parties:	BOARD OF MANAGEMENT OF SALESIAN SECONDARY COLLEGE (LIMERICK) FACEBOOK IRELAND LIMITED FACEBOOK IRELAND LIMITED
National Case Number/Name:	2021 IEHC 287
European Case Law Identifier:	2020 No. 1419 P
Appeal from:
Appeal to:
Original Language(s):	English
Original Source:	High Court Ireland (in English)
Initial Contributor:	Tara Taubman-Bassirian

A school requested the disclosure of identities of Instagram account holders from Facebook. Facebook opposed by requesting a court order. In response to a request for such an order, the High Court judge stated his intention to make a reference for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice pursuant to Article 267 of the TFEU, and invited parties to make submissions in respect of the necessity for same. The school authorities filed written submissions on 22 April 2021. Counsel for the school confirmed, at a directions hearing on 18 May 2021, that his side were content to rest on the written submissions and did not require a further oral hearing.

English Summary

Facts

An account on Instagram posted inappropriate, vulgar and sexual messages about staff at Salesian Secondary School in Limerick. For example, some messages ridiculed staff's personal appearance, weight, and sexuality. The photos accompanying the messages did not depict school staff but were sourced from the internet. The account also featured the school's address, crest, and name, and referred to its official website. The messages were deleted and the account taken down after the school's solicitor posted a request on the account. The school was also able to access the password via a student.

The board of management of the school brought an application in the Irish Court seeking an order that Facebook Ireland, who owns Instagram, to disclose all data it holds which evidences the identity of the person(s) behind the account, including name(s), address, contact details, and IP address.

The school authorities had previously contacted Facebook Ireland requesting information with a view to identifying the individuals. Facebook responded stating that they could not disclose user information to a private third party without a court order or request from law enforcement.

Holding

The High Court judge, Mr. Justice Garrett Simons, considered it necessary to refer a number of questions in the case to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling, pursuant to Article 267 of the TFEU. In particular:

Do the rights of privacy, data protection, and freedom of expression conferred under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU ('the Charter') imply a right, in principle, to post material anonymously on the internet (subject always to any countervailing objective of public interest)? If so, is this right qualified in the case of the students and staff of a secondary school?
What is the threshold to be met under the GDPR and/or the Charter before the provider of a social media platform can be compelled to disclose, to a third party, information which would identify an otherwise anonymous account user? Is it necessary for the third party seeking disclosure to establish a strong prima facie case of tortious wrongdoing and an intention to pursue legal proceedings? Alternatively, does the board of management of a secondary school have a sufficient interest in disciplining its students and staff for their online activities to entitle it to disclosure, even in the absence of an intention to pursue legal proceedings? If so, is it necessary to establish that the online activities are disruptive to the school environment?
Is there any necessity for a national court to attempt to put the affected party on notice of an application which seeks to identify the operators of an otherwise anonymous user account? Should, for example, the national court direct that the social media platform notify the party and inform them that they have an opportunity to make submissions anonymously to the court?

Comment

The application for a disclosure order presents significant legal issues in respect of privacy, data protection and freedom of expression, or whether an expectation of anonymity on the internet is an aspect of the right to the protection of personal data and the right to freedom of expression. It worth highlighting that the facts date back mid October 2019, while to court decision to refer to the ECJ has been made May 2021, one year and 7 months later. A suivre...

Further Resources

Share blogs or news articles here!

English Machine Translation of the Decision

The decision below is a machine translation of the English original. Please refer to the English original for more details.

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 |Courtlogo=Courts_logo1.png
 |Court_Abbrevation=The High Court
-|Court_With_Country=The High Court (Ireland)
+|Court_With_Country=High Court (Ireland)
 |Case_Number_Name=2021 IEHC 287
@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 }}
-School request the disclosure of identities of instagram account holders from Facebook. Facebook oppose by requesting a court order. The High Court judge making a reference for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice pursuant to Article 267 of the TFEU.  The parties were invited to make submissions in respect  of  the  necessity  for  same. The  school  authorities  filed  written  submissions  on  22 April  2021.  Counsel  for  the  school  confirmed,  at  a  directions  hearing  on  18 May 2021, that his side were content to rest on the written submissions and did not require a further oral hearing.
+A school requested the disclosure of identities of Instagram account holders from Facebook. Facebook opposed by requesting a court order. In response to a request for such an order, the High Court judge stated his intention to make a reference for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice pursuant to Article 267 of the TFEU, and invited parties to make submissions in respect  of  the  necessity  for  same. The  school  authorities  filed  written  submissions  on  22 April  2021.  Counsel  for  the  school  confirmed,  at  a  directions  hearing  on  18 May 2021, that his side were content to rest on the written submissions and did not require a further oral hearing.
 == English Summary ==
 === Facts ===
-A short life account on Instagram has posted inappropriate, vulgar and sexual messages about a school staff. The messages were deleted and the account taken down after the school's solicitor posted request on the account, The school was further able to access the password via a student. The objective of these proceedings is to compel the social media platform, Instagram, to identify the individuals behind one of its user accounts.  The proceedings are taken by the board of management of a secondary school.  The school authorities apprehend that the now inactive user account had been operated by individuals who are either students or staff members of the school. They seek to identify these individuals for the stated purpose of “dealing with” them by way of what they describe as a “disciplinary or pastoral response”. The school authorities sought to contact the company providing the social media platform and requested information with a view to identifying the individuals who had operated the user account.  Facebook Ireland Ltd.’s position is they cannot  disclose  user  information  to  a  private  third  party  without  a  court  order  or  request  from  law  enforcement to be addressed to and served upon Facebook Ireland, to identify the Instagram account at issue by specific uniform resource locator (‘URL’)
+An account on Instagram posted inappropriate, vulgar and sexual messages about staff at Salesian Secondary School in Limerick. For example, some messages ridiculed staff's personal appearance, weight, and sexuality. The photos accompanying the messages did not depict school staff but were sourced from the internet. The account also featured the school's address, crest, and name, and referred to its official website. The messages were deleted and the account taken down after the school's solicitor posted a request on the account. The school was also able to access the password via a student.
-=== Dispute ===
+The board of management of the school brought an application in the Irish Court seeking an order that Facebook Ireland, who owns Instagram, to disclose all data it holds which evidences the identity of the person(s) behind the account, including name(s), address, contact details, and IP address.
-The disclosure application presents significant  legal  issues  in  respect  of  privacy,  data  protection and freedom of expression.  For the reasons set out in this judgment, I have concluded that it is necessary to make a reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling on these issues.  This reference will be made pursuant to Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”)
+The school authorities had previously contacted Facebook Ireland requesting information with a view to identifying the individuals. Facebook responded stating that they could not disclose  user  information  to  a  private  third  party  without  a  court  order  or  request  from  law  enforcement.
 === Holding ===
-making a reference for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justicepursuant to Article 267 of the TFEU.  The parties were invited to make submissions in respect  of  the  necessity  for  same.    The  school  authorities  filed  written  submissions  on  22 April  2021.    Counsel  for  the  school  confirmed,  at  a  directions  hearing  on  18 May 2021, that his side were content to rest on the written submissions and did not require a further oral hearing.
+The High Court judge, Mr. Justice Garrett Simons, considered it necessary to refer a number of questions in the case to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling, pursuant to Article 267 of the TFEU. In particular:
+* Do the rights of privacy, data protection, and freedom of expression conferred under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU ('the Charter') imply  a  right,  in  principle,  to  post material anonymously on  the  internet  (subject  always  to  any  countervailing objective of public interest)?  If so, is this right qualified in the case of the students and staff of a secondary school?
+* What  is  the  threshold  to  be  met  under  the  GDPR and/or the Charter before the provider of a social media platform can be compelled to  disclose,   to  a  third  party,  information  which  would  identify  an  otherwise anonymous account user?  Is it necessary for the third party seeking disclosure to establish  a  strong prima  facie case  of  tortious  wrongdoing  and  an  intention  to pursue  legal  proceedings? Alternatively,  does the  board  of  management  of  a secondary school have a sufficient interest in disciplining its students and staff for their online activities to entitle it to disclosure, even in the absence of an intention to  pursue  legal  proceedings?  If  so,  is  it  necessary  to  establish  that  the  online activities are disruptive to the school environment?
+* Is there any necessity for a national court to attempt to put the affected party on notice of an application which seeks  to  identify  the  operators  of  an  otherwise anonymous user account?  Should, for example, the national court direct that the social  media  platform  notify  the  party  and  inform  them  that  they  have  an opportunity to make submissions anonymously to the court?
 == Comment ==
-It worth to highlight that the facts date back mid October 2019, while to court decision has been made May 2021, a mare one year and 7 months later, the school authorities have been chasing the authors of the publications.
+The application for a disclosure order presents significant  legal  issues  in  respect  of  privacy,  data  protection and freedom of expression, or whether an expectation of anonymity on the internet is an aspect of the right to the protection of personal data and the right to freedom of expression. It worth highlighting that the facts date back mid October 2019, while to court decision to refer to the ECJ has been made May 2021, one year and 7 months later. A suivre...
 == Further Resources ==