Cited by 0Law, Rights, and FreedomsFreedom of Expression and DefamationIntellectual Property Rights and Media

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Privacy, access to court documents and open justice

Open access
Latu, Alex·2026·Journal of Media Law

Abstract

The open justice principle continues to interrelate with and affect the development of privacy torts. Against this backdrop this article considers the privacy/open justice dynamic in decisions on access to court documents – focusing on those which have featured in open court. In this context privacy can and has been broadly construed to outweigh open justice reasons favouring disclosure, with the relevant principles developed pre-Campbell v MGN Ltd, when fewer privacy protections existed. Now, Campbell-type methodology offers a more structured way to assess privacy considerations when considering access. It might also provide greater backstop privacy protection, justifying less intensive scrutiny at the earlier access stage, or even proactive publication. If so, it would become important to consider the extent of reasonable expectations of privacy in material made accessible by courts. This might usefully draw on freedom of information principles, and defences applicable to court reporting.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/17577632.2026.2668317

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Metadata

Authors
Latu, A.
Affiliations
University of Otago (NZ)
Corresponding author
Latu, Alex
Venue
Journal of Media Law
Published
2026-01-02
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
203-225
ISSN
  • 1757-7632 (ISSN-L)
  • 1757-7640
OpenAlex
W7161639471
Cited by
0
References
0
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Media Law (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Otago University Research Archive (University of Otago) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Law, Rights, and Freedoms
  • Social Sciences › Law › Freedom of Expression and Defamation
  • Social Sciences › Law › Intellectual Property Rights and Media
Keywords
privacy, open justice, access to court documents, privacy torts, reasonable expectation of privacy, freedom of information, open court

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Privacy, access to court documents and open justice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/17577632.2026.2668317
The paper
Latu, A. (2026). Privacy, access to court documents and open justice. Journal of Media Law. https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2026.2668317