Judge to give ruling on Google 'right-to-be-forgotten' case

Judge to give ruling on Google 'right-to-be-forgotten' case

Judge to give ruling on Google 'right-to-be-forgotten' case

Passing judgement on the case, Mr Justice Warby said: "It is quite likely that there will be more claims of this kind, and the fact that NT2 has succeeded is likely to reinforce that". He served a six-month prison sentence.

Justice Mark Warby ruled in favour of an unnamed businessman on Friday, siding with his argument that his criminal conviction was now legally "spent", and that they have been rehabilitated.

The claimant who lost, referred to only as NT1 for legal reasons, was convicted of conspiracy to account falsely in the late 1990s; the claimant who won, known as NT2, was convicted more than 10 years ago of conspiracy to intercept communications.

The lawsuit and judge's order came after Google initially refused to remove search results pertaining to the man's convictions (including results that linked to news articles), which the petitioner claimed were both harmful and no longer relevant, and, hence, subject to erasure due to the Right to be Forgotten.

A man has won the "right to be forgotten" by Google in a landmark ruling against the search giant, in which he appealed to have a past criminal conviction removed form the search engine's results.

President Trump puts off decision on Syria strikes
Mattis said options would be discussed with Trump at a meeting of his National Security Council on Thursday afternoon . London put "powerful pressure" on the civil defense organization, he said, Agence France-Presse reported.

The judge announced his decisions in the two cases, which were both contested by Google, following separate High Court trials.

"He remains in business, and the information serves the objective of minimising the risk that he will continue to mislead, as he has in the past". NT1's conduct demonstrates that "he can not be trusted to provide an accurate account of his business background", the judge wrote.

In a statement, Google said it "will respect the judgments they have made in this case".

The judge ruled out any damages payment, and told the court: "NT2 has frankly acknowledged his guilt and expressed genuine remorse".

"His past offending is of little if any relevance to anybody's assessment of his suitability to engage in relevant business activity now, or in the future", the judge wrote. The Alphabet Inc. unit must remove information about a person on request if it's outdated or irrelevant under a 2014 European Union top court ruling.

Russian Federation launched hack attack on Skripal email years ago: UK
Also Friday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov responded to an worldwide chemical weapons watchdog's report on the poisoning. Yulia Skripal, 33, was released from the hospital earlier this week and transferred to an undisclosed "secure location".

The lawyers said the ruling "has wide-ranging and general implications for take-down requests and subsequent action in relation to inaccurate personal data and references to spent convictions on the internet".

What is the right to be forgotten?

. However, search engines can decline to remove pages if they judge them to remain in the public interest.

"There is an inherent tension between an individual's right to privacy and what information the public interest requires be available", said solicitor Ben Rose, who is based at law firm Hickman & Rose.

He added it could draw "additional publicity for the information in question".

School board approves tentative budget with tax increase — MONTGOMERY
As agreed from the beginning of the process, the search firm did a detailed background check that the board received on March 19. She also now participates as a student leader on the district's Sanctuary District Task Force, while maintaining a 4.0 GPA.

Related news