https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112459 A corporate plaintiff could not invoke Article 21 privacy against the press because privacy protects natural persons and operates primarily against State action, so the privacy-based claim failed. Confidentiality, however, was recognised in principle as a civil cause of action under the law of breach of confidence, but only where information is genuinely sensitive, obtained in confidence, and disclosure is unauthorised and detrimental; on the facts, that threshold was not shown for the asserted restrictions. Applying public interest, proportionality, and press freedom under Article 19(1)(a), the Court refused prior restraint because the impugned reports did not justify injunctions. en-us Mon, 13 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Nov 2014 15:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112459 A corporate plaintiff could not invoke Article 21 privacy against the press because privacy protects natural persons and operates primarily against State action, so the privacy-based claim failed. Confidentiality, however, was recognised in principle as a civil cause of action under the law of breach of confidence, but only where information is genuinely sensitive, obtained in confidence, and disclosure is unauthorised and detrimental; on the facts, that threshold was not shown for the asserted restrictions. Applying public interest, proportionality, and press freedom under Article 19(1)(a), the Court refused prior restraint because the impugned reports did not justify injunctions. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 13 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112459