{"id":462,"date":"2019-03-19T15:47:15","date_gmt":"2019-03-19T15:47:15","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2019-06-07T12:54:50","modified_gmt":"2019-06-07T12:54:50","slug":"breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php","title":{"rendered":"Breach of Confidence and Private Information: Human Rights and Brexit"},"content":{"rendered":"

The law of confidence protected privacy interest to an extent prior to the HRA 1998 It has been utilised to give a wider protection to the right of privacy as familiarised under article 8 of the \u2018ECHR\u2019 thus, the action has experienced notable doctrinal shift. An obligation of confidence may arise either impliedly or expressly or on an independent equitable basis of a contract per the Coco v Clark<\/a> which will be discussed in this essay, PRE HRA, these key elements are not fully applicable to the private and personal information, because the defence of \u2018public interest\u2019 has been interwoven with the right to freedom of expression in the ART 10 of the ECHR. [1]<\/a>  <\/p>\n

In the essay, will discuss if the breach of confidence is superfluous and is likely to wither on the judicial vine with use of the key elements of breach of confidence and the continually changing misuse of private information, uncertainty of HRA\u2019s future and UK\u2019s human right protection post-Brexit<\/a>, [2]<\/a>  and the trade directives.<\/p>\n

As mentioned above before a duty of confidence is established. It ought to have some key elements which are 1). the necessary quality of confidence 2).  the information must have been imparted by a person to another in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence 3).  an unauthorised use or disclosure of the information by the party under an obligation of confidence the following have been elaborated on above. The case law following the HRA illustrates that the previous Coco v Clark <\/em>requirement has been altered instead of the former if the personal information has the \u2018necessary quality of confidence\u2019 the courts now question if the information is \u2018private\u2019 and when it is private does it deem the information as confidential and this change takes effect in the HOL decision in Campbell v Mirror groups Newspaper<\/em>. In this case The appellant (C), a popular model, appealed against the decision ([which had the effect of dismissing her claim against the  newspaper (M) for damages for breach of confidence and compensation under the Data Protection Act 1998. D had published stories about C relating to her attendance at Narcotics Anonymous (NA) meetings. C had previously stated publicly that she did not take drugs. C claimed damages for breach of confidence and compensation under the 1998 Act, alleging the wrongful publication by D of private information. [3]<\/a>  in Campbell v MGN the Court of Appeal advised that the \u2018unjustifiable publication of private information would be better described as breach of privacy rather than breach of confidence\u2019 and in the House of Lords, Lord Nicholl added that in spite of the view it took the unanswered  important question is if there remains a role for \u2018traditional\u2019 breach of confidence in the realm of personal information because it seems that the usual standard might have changed.[4]<\/a> Although publication was necessary to clarify her prior statements on drug usage however the additional information such as the photographs might have been an invasion of C\u2019s private life and in the recent Brown V Associated Newspaper Ltd, Sir Anthony Clarke MR d Sir Anthony Clarke MR  held that: ‘… whether any piece of information qualifies as private and the claimant has a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of it, requires a detailed examination of all the circumstances on a case by case basis.’ Relevant circumstances to examine are the nature of the information, the circumstances in which it has been conveyed or obtained and the connection between the person of relevance and the information. Although it remains unclear how the English courts\u2019 test of ‘reasonable expectation of privacy’ is to be reconciled with the ECtHR\u2019s decision in Von Hannover V Germany, which validates a wider explanation of Art 8 implying that any publication of an unauthorized photograph specifically taken of a particular person engaged in an everyday activity outside their official duties will involve a prima facie violation\u2019. \u2018Confidential\u2019 information should be \u2018private\u2019 or out of reach from the public domain for instance where C had authorised photographs to be taken by a magazine (OK!) thus they were incapable of obtaining an interlocutory injunction, regardless of how it was obtained for financial gains in the Douglas v Hello! Ltd.<\/em> The rationale of introducing the obligation might be that the person knows or ought to know that the information is ‘private’. The court would try to balance the clashing Art 8 and 10 rights of the defendant\u2019s public interest’ defence which role and scope was impacted by the HRA. earlier cases following the HRA, the trend was towards a more lenient definition of what initiates a \u2018public interest[5]<\/a>‘. There has been a debate on the role of invasion in determining the misuse of private information. [6]<\/a> This will be illustrated in the PJS v Newspaper<\/em>, C had an extra marital affair with AB for a while but this affair came to its ending right after AB\u2019s sexual encounter with PJS partner. In 2016 his partners intended to sell their story to Sunday newspaper. C and his wife were both popular celebrities with young children. They were pursuit of ways to stop the newspaper from publishing the story, and claimed that it would be a misuse of private information and an actionable breach of confidence and to grant an interim injunction a reasonable expectation of privacy could be established for this information, if any This was incorrect because Re S is clear that \u2018Art 8 nor Art 10 of the convention has presumptive priority\u2019 It made another mistake by highlighting that there was a \u2018limited public interest\u2019 in the expression at stake. This CoA had stated that the press has a given right to criticise morally incorrect behaviour, even though it is not illegal, But Lord Mance argued that \u2018criticism of conducts cannot be a pretext for invasion of privacy by disclosure of alleged sexual infidelity which is of no real public interest in legal sense\u2019. [7]<\/a><\/p>\n

Lastly, in developing the
\nprivacy law, the verdict in PJS has shown that the judges might be willing to
\ntake privacy laws seriously, but there is still a debate if this invasion
\ndoctrine will take the law. [8]<\/a>  <\/p>\n

A
\nseparate tort of privacy will allow its interests to be addressed in a
\nstraightforward and more productive manner than breach of confidence. Asides
\nthe disclosure of private information it is uncertain what other \u2018intrusions\u2019
\nof privacy may be covered, whether a tort of privacy will lead to a more
\ncomprehensive scope of privacy that is presently the case under Breach of
\nconfidence depends on the scope of the tort recognised. Thus in New Zealand the
\nCoA in Hosking v Runting shed light on the tort of privacy rather than develop
\nan action for breach of confidence, in line with the English court. The court
\ndefined the tort as \u2018relating to a wrongful publicity of private facts\u2019. Gaunt
\nand Blanchard JJ claimed that either way the same result would have been
\nderived either by a privacy or the breach of confidence path. However, the
\nformer was preferred because it might be \u2018conducive of clearer analysis\u2019.  Arguably, even if a privacy law is narrow,
\nrelatively new and offers the same ground of protection as the breach of
\nconfidence, the development of privacy offers further expansion possibilities.
\nIn Hosking v Runting the court did not eliminate a tortious solution for
\n\u2018unreasonable intrusion into a person\u2019s solitude or seclusion\u2019 but simply paved
\nway for the issue for another time. A tort of privacy might provide lucidity
\nand greater protection in awarding damages, as their difficulties associated
\nwith awarding damages for breach of equitable obligation of confidence. In
\nkeeping with the shifts<\/strong> that may
\nhave occurred post HRA era, the tort of privacy, specifically the misuse of
\nprivate information would be of importance. 
\nThe eradicated second limb of Coco v Clark, about the personal and
\nprivate information and the emphasis on \u2018private\u2019 information to establish a
\nduty of non-disclosure and the willingness of the court to award damages for
\nmental distress may point towards the action of privacy instead of the breach
\nof confidence. Sadly, the judicial doubt concerning the nature of the cause of
\naction persists.  The CoA in Douglas V
\nHello expressed disappointment at constantly having to \u2018shoe horn\u2019 privacy into
\nthe breach of confidence, whilst simultaneously repeating the nature of the actionable
\nbreach of confidence. Acknowledging the tort of privacy could
\nassist the in courts to identifying damages to deter and punish \u2018offensive and surreptitious
\njournalism for financial gains.[9]<\/a><\/p>\n

Alas, the HRA is an
\nessential part of domestic protection of human rights, However the
\nlikelihood of it being nullified along with the pessimistic attitude toward,
\ninternational agreements such as the convention and the treaties of the EU is
\nbothersome concerning the future of the protection of the human rights in the
\nUK because it is unclear if its current legislation will still offer protection
\nfor human rights now that Brexit has occurred. Per Google v. Vidal Hall, \u2018there
\nare now two separate and distinct causes of action: an action for breach of confidence;
\nand one for misuse of private information\u2019. The changes to the breach of
\nconfidence has through engagement of the rights and jurisprudence of the
\nConvention led to the formation of a \u2018domestic privacy right\u2019 and understanding
\nit on a case by case basis whilst trying to maintain the \u2018domestic\u2019 norm.
\nHowever the courts are struggling till date to apply \u2018domestic\u2019 law,  and realistically If courts have and are
\nstill in the process of expanding the common law, then maybe no legislative
\nincorporation of the Convention is needed.[10]<\/a> <\/p>\n

Trade
\nsecrets, are valued assets, it plays a vital role in commercial growth and
\nadvancing innovation[11]<\/a>. The
\naim of the trade secret directive is to harmonize vital points of the civil
\ntrade protection in the EU by providing monotonous definitions and requirements
\nincluding minimal procedural standards. The
\ninternational framework is shaped by Art. 39 TRIPS,15 which grants
\n\u2018\u2018undisclosed information\u2019\u2019 protection against unfair competition \u2018\u2018as provided
\nin Article 10bis of the Paris Convention\u2019\u2019,16 meaning that protection is
\nafforded against conduct contrary to \u2018\u2018honest business practices\u2019\u2019.17 Under the
\nframework that a suitable information has an economic value as it is
\nconfidential.[12]<\/a>  Thus, In Avery Dennison Corp. v. Four
\nPillars Enter. Co., an employee stole “Avery\u2019s formulas and other
\nconfidential information for eight years and passed them on to Four
\nPillars,” which, in turn, modified Avery’s formulas, created new products,
\nand saved significantly on research and streamlining its manufacturing
\nprocess\u201d. The court stated that although D changed the trade secret this does
\nnot release it from its liability. ‘The necessity of good faith and honest,
\nfair dealing, is the very life and spirit of the commercial world.” [13]<\/a>  The EU commission
\nissued a proposed trade secret directive on the 28th <\/sup>November 2013,
\nand the EU directive on the protection of trade secrets commenced on the 5th
\n<\/sup>July 2016. Across the European union the directive will harmonize the
\ntrade secret law. It explains what might embody a protectable trade secrets
\nsets of common remedies for the misappropriation of trade secret. Member states
\nof the EU have till the 9th<\/sup> June 2018 to execute the directive into
\nthe UK law, however it might override the legislation prior to Brexit if the
\nWTO model is approved. [14]<\/a><\/p>\n

This essay has discussed if the
\nbreach of confidence is superfluous and is likely to wither on the judicial
\nvine with the use of key elements of the breach of confidence, the continually
\nchanging misuse of private information and the uncertainty of the HRA\u2019s future
\nalong with UK\u2019s human rights protection post brexit and lastly the trade
\ndirectives.  Lastly, it appears the
\nbreach of confidential is slowly fading away as more of the time it is adjusted
\nto fit into the privacy law rather than the breach of confidence.  <\/p>\n

BIBLIOGRAPHY\n<\/p>\n

Aplin T, ‘The Future Of Breach Of
\nConfidence And The Protection Of Privacy’ (2007) 7 Oxford University
\nCommonwealth Law Journal<\/p>\n

Falce V, ‘Trade Secrets \u2013 Looking
\nFor (Full) Harmonization In The Innovation Union’ (2015) 46 IIC – International
\nReview of Intellectual Property and Competition Law<\/p>\n

Fikfak V, ‘Protecting Human Rights
\nIn Austerity Claims In The UK’ [2016] SSRN Electronic Journal<\/p>\n

Natalja S, ‘EU Directive Proposal :
\nTrade Secrets’ (2016) 20 Marquette intellectual property law review<\/p>\n

Patel A and others, ‘The Global
\nHarmonization Of Trade Secret Law: The Convergence Of Protections For Trade
\nSecret Information In The United States And European Union’ (2016) 83 Defense
\nCounsel Journal<\/p>\n

Traub F, ‘What Next For
\nIntellectual Property Rights?’ (2017) 36 The licensing journal<\/p>\n

Wragg P, ‘Privacy And The Emergent
\nIntrusion Doctrine’ (2017) 9 Journal of Media Law<\/p>\n

\n

[1]<\/a> Tanya Aplin, ‘The Future of Breach of Confidence and
\nThe Protection Of Privacy’ (2007) 7 Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal.
\n(p. 139)<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> Veronika Fikfak, ‘Protecting Human Rights in Austerity
\nClaims in The UK’ [2016] SSRN Electronic Journal. (p. 221)<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a>   Coco v Clark [1969] R.P.C 41<\/em>  ,Campbell v Mirror groups Newspaper Ltd
\n[2004] UKHL 22<\/em>, <\/p>\n

Tanya Aplin, ‘The Future of Breach of Confidence and The Protection Of
\nPrivacy’ (2007) 7 Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal. (p. 139)<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a>  Tanya Aplin, ‘The Future of Breach of Confidence and The
\nProtection Of Privacy’ (2007) 7 Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal
\n(p.152)<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> Douglas v Hello! Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 59<\/em>
\n, Tanya
\nAplin, ‘The Future of Breach of Confidence and The Protection Of Privacy’
\n(2007) 7 Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal.<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> Paul Wragg, ‘Privacy And The
\nEmergent Intrusion Doctrine’ (2017) 9 Journal of Media Law (p.15).<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a>
\nibid (p.19)<\/p>\n

[8]<\/a>
\nibid (p.26)<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a> Tanya Aplin, ‘The
\nFuture of Breach of Confidence and The Protection Of Privacy’ (2007) 7 Oxford
\nUniversity Commonwealth Law Journal (p. 152- 159)<\/p>\n

[10]<\/a> Veronika Fikfak,
\n‘Protecting Human Rights in Austerity Claims in the UK’ [2016] SSRN Electronic
\nJournal. (p.221)<\/p>\n

[11]<\/a>
\nit protects technical information such as fragrance ingredients and
\nnon-technical information such as a sales list.   Sosnova Natalja, ‘EU Directive Proposal: Trade Secrets’ (2016) 20
\nMarquette intellectual property law review. (p.47)<\/p>\n

[12]<\/a>  Valeria Falce, ‘Trade Secrets \u2013 Looking For (Full) Harmonization In The
\nInnovation Union’ (2015) 46 IIC – International Review of Intellectual Property
\nand Competition Law.<\/p>\n

[13]<\/a> Sosnova Natalja, ‘EU Directive Proposal:
\nTrade Secrets’ (2016) 20 Marquette intellectual property law review. (p.57)<\/p>\n

[14]<\/a> Florian Traub, ‘What Next For
\nIntellectual Property Rights?’ (2017) 36 The licensing journal. (p.12)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The essay will discuss if the breach of confidence is superfluous and is likely to wither on the judicial vine with use of the key elements of breach of confidence and the misuse of private information.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[28],"tags":[85],"class_list":["post-462","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-free-law-essayshuman-rights","tag-uk-law"],"yoast_head":"\nBreach of Confidence and Private Information: Human Rights and Brexit | LawTeacher.net<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The essay will discuss if the breach of confidence is superfluous and is likely to wither on the judicial vine with use of the key elements of breach of confidence and the misuse of private information.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Breach of Confidence and Private Information: Human Rights and Brexit\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The essay will discuss if the breach of confidence is superfluous and is likely to wither on the judicial vine with use of the key elements of breach of confidence and the misuse of private information.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"LawTeacher.net\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-large-logo.webp\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1920\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1080\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/webp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"LawTeacher\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@LawTeacherNet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@LawTeacherNet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"LawTeacher\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"ScholarlyArticle\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"LawTeacher\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e\"},\"headline\":\"Breach of Confidence and Private Information: Human Rights and Brexit\",\"datePublished\":\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php\"},\"wordCount\":2337,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"UK Law\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Human Rights Law\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php\",\"name\":\"Breach of Confidence and Private Information: Human Rights and Brexit | LawTeacher.net\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\",\"description\":\"The essay will discuss if the breach of confidence is superfluous and is likely to wither on the judicial vine with use of the key elements of breach of confidence and the misuse of private information.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Breach of Confidence and Private Information: Human Rights and Brexit\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/\",\"name\":\"Law Teacher\",\"description\":\"The Law Essay Professionals\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"LawTeacher.net\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Law Teacher\",\"alternateName\":\"LawTeacher.net\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg\",\"width\":250,\"height\":250,\"caption\":\"Law Teacher\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet\",\"https:\/\/api.whatsapp.com\/send\/?phone=447723491966&text&type=phone_number&app_absent=0\"],\"description\":\"Law Teacher provides academic writing services for law students throughout the world.\",\"email\":\"contact@lawteacher.net\",\"telephone\":\"+44 115 966 7966\",\"numberOfEmployees\":{\"@type\":\"QuantitativeValue\",\"minValue\":\"51\",\"maxValue\":\"200\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e\",\"name\":\"LawTeacher\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"LawTeacher\"},\"description\":\"LawTeacher.net is the UK's leading provider of academic legal support, offering both writing services and an extensive collection of law study resources for students in the UK and overseas. Founded in 2003 by Grey's Inn graduate Barclay Littlewood, the Company was built on a commitment to excellence, with unique guarantees and a high standard of service from day one. The team includes over 500 UK legally qualified writing experts, with many practising solicitors and barristers, and several former lecturers.\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet\",\"https:\/\/gravatar.com\/lawteacherprofile\"],\"knowsAbout\":[\"Contract Law\",\"Criminal Law\",\"Constitutional and Administrative Law\",\"EU Law\",\"Tort Law\",\"Property Law\",\"Equity and Trusts\",\"Jurisprudence\",\"Company Law\",\"Commercial Law\",\"Family Law\",\"Human Rights Law\",\"Employment Law\",\"Evidence\",\"Public International Law\",\"Legal Research and Methods\",\"Dispute Resolution\",\"Business Law and Practice\",\"Civil Litigation\",\"Criminal Litigation\",\"Professional Conduct\",\"Taxation\",\"Wills and Administration of Estates\",\"Solicitors\u2019 Accounts\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/author\/lawteacher\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Breach of Confidence and Private Information: Human Rights and Brexit | LawTeacher.net","description":"The essay will discuss if the breach of confidence is superfluous and is likely to wither on the judicial vine with use of the key elements of breach of confidence and the misuse of private information.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"Breach of Confidence and Private Information: Human Rights and Brexit","og_description":"The essay will discuss if the breach of confidence is superfluous and is likely to wither on the judicial vine with use of the key elements of breach of confidence and the misuse of private information.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php","og_site_name":"LawTeacher.net","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet","article_published_time":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1920,"height":1080,"url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-large-logo.webp","type":"image\/webp"}],"author":"LawTeacher","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@LawTeacherNet","twitter_site":"@LawTeacherNet","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"LawTeacher","Estimated reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"ScholarlyArticle","@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php"},"author":{"name":"LawTeacher","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e"},"headline":"Breach of Confidence and Private Information: Human Rights and Brexit","datePublished":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php"},"wordCount":2337,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization"},"keywords":["UK Law"],"articleSection":["Human Rights Law"],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php","url":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php","name":"Breach of Confidence and Private Information: Human Rights and Brexit | LawTeacher.net","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website"},"datePublished":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","description":"The essay will discuss if the breach of confidence is superfluous and is likely to wither on the judicial vine with use of the key elements of breach of confidence and the misuse of private information.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/human-rights\/breach-of-confidence-brexit-9372.php#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Breach of Confidence and Private Information: Human Rights and Brexit"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website","url":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/","name":"Law Teacher","description":"The Law Essay Professionals","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization"},"alternateName":"LawTeacher.net","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization","name":"Law Teacher","alternateName":"LawTeacher.net","url":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg","width":250,"height":250,"caption":"Law Teacher"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/","https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet","https:\/\/api.whatsapp.com\/send\/?phone=447723491966&text&type=phone_number&app_absent=0"],"description":"Law Teacher provides academic writing services for law students throughout the world.","email":"contact@lawteacher.net","telephone":"+44 115 966 7966","numberOfEmployees":{"@type":"QuantitativeValue","minValue":"51","maxValue":"200"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e","name":"LawTeacher","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"LawTeacher"},"description":"LawTeacher.net is the UK's leading provider of academic legal support, offering both writing services and an extensive collection of law study resources for students in the UK and overseas. Founded in 2003 by Grey's Inn graduate Barclay Littlewood, the Company was built on a commitment to excellence, with unique guarantees and a high standard of service from day one. The team includes over 500 UK legally qualified writing experts, with many practising solicitors and barristers, and several former lecturers.","sameAs":["https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet","https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet","https:\/\/gravatar.com\/lawteacherprofile"],"knowsAbout":["Contract Law","Criminal Law","Constitutional and Administrative Law","EU Law","Tort Law","Property Law","Equity and Trusts","Jurisprudence","Company Law","Commercial Law","Family Law","Human Rights Law","Employment Law","Evidence","Public International Law","Legal Research and Methods","Dispute Resolution","Business Law and Practice","Civil Litigation","Criminal Litigation","Professional Conduct","Taxation","Wills and Administration of Estates","Solicitors\u2019 Accounts"],"url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/author\/lawteacher"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/462","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=462"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/462\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=462"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=462"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=462"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}