Privacy vs Publication: Mktrchyan v 2Trom Media Group Ltd

The High Court’s recent decision in Mktrchyan v 2Trom Media Group Ltd [2026] EWHC 1923 (KB) is another stark reminder in the law of privacy, online publications and reputation management. The case serves as a warning to digital publishers that the speed and reach of internet publishing does not diminish the legal obligations owed to individuals whose private information is placed into the public domain.

For individuals who have found themselves the subject of intrusive online reporting, the judgment provides reassurance that the courts remain willing to scrutinise publications closely and to protect legitimate expectations of privacy. For publishers, bloggers and media organisations, it underlines the continuing importance of careful editorial decision-making before personal information is disseminated online.

The growing importance of privacy claims

Over the past two decades, privacy law in England and Wales has developed significantly through the interaction between Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to respect for private and family life) and Article 10 (freedom of expression).

Whilst freedom of expression remains a fundamental right, it is not absolute. The courts are routinely required to undertake a balancing exercise between competing rights, asking whether publication serves a genuine public interest and whether an individual’s privacy rights ought to prevail.

The expansion of digital media has intensified that tension. Information published online can be replicated instantly, remain accessible indefinitely and appear prominently in internet search results years after publication. As a result, privacy disputes increasingly focus not only on whether information should have been published in the first place, but also on the lasting consequences of its publication.

What makes the decision significant?

Although every privacy claim turns on its own facts, Mktrchyan highlights several themes that continue to shape modern privacy litigation.

The High Court was required to consider the extent to which private information could lawfully be published and whether the publication complained of was justified. Typically, the courts are required to analyse:

These issues sit at the heart of almost every misuse of private information claim brought before the courts.

“Public interest” is not the same as “interesting to the public”

One of the recurring misconceptions in media law is the assumption that public curiosity automatically creates a public interest defence.

The courts have repeatedly rejected that proposition. Information may attract attention, generate clicks or encourage engagement on social media, yet still lack any legitimate public interest justification.

When advising clients who have been subjected to intrusive reporting, one of the first issues we examine is whether the publisher can genuinely demonstrate that publication contributed to a matter of public importance. If the answer is no, the prospects of a successful privacy claim often improve considerably.

The judgment reinforces the need for publishers to distinguish carefully between material that the public may want to read and material that the law genuinely permits them to publish.

Online publications face particular risks

A notable feature of modern privacy litigation is the way in which courts increasingly recognise the practical impact of online publication.

Historically, a newspaper article might disappear from public view after a single news cycle. Today, articles are searchable indefinitely and frequently appear in response to internet searches concerning an individual’s name.

This means that the damage resulting from a privacy breach can be long-lasting and far reaching. Employment opportunities, personal relationships and mental wellbeing can all be affected by information that remains permanently accessible online.

For clients seeking to protect their privacy, legal remedies may extend beyond damages. Depending on the circumstances, it may be possible to obtain:

Early legal intervention is often critical. Once information becomes widely disseminated online, containing its spread becomes significantly more difficult.

What potential claimants should take from this case

One of the most important messages emerging from Mktrchyan v 2Trom Media Group Ltd is that individuals should not assume they are powerless simply because information has already been published online.

Many prospective clients initially believe that if an article appears on a website, social media platform or online news outlet, nothing can be done. That is rarely the case.

Privacy law in England and Wales provides a range of remedies where personal information has been unlawfully disclosed. The key issue is usually whether the individual had a reasonable expectation of privacy and whether the publisher can justify the interference with that right.

Each case requires a careful analysis of the facts, but the courts continue to demonstrate a willingness to protect individuals from unjustified intrusions into their private lives.

Specialist advice matters

Privacy claims are highly fact-sensitive and often develop quickly. Decisions taken in the hours and days immediately following publication can have a significant impact on the outcome of a case.

A specialist privacy solicitor will consider not only the legal merits of a claim but also the broader reputational and practical objectives of the client. In many cases, the goal is not simply financial compensation. Clients frequently seek urgent removal of material, protection against further dissemination and restoration of their privacy.

The decision in Mktrchyan illustrates that privacy rights remain a powerful and evolving area of law. For those faced with intrusive online publications, the case is another example of the courts’ readiness to examine whether publishers have overstepped the mark. For media organisations, it is a reminder that responsible journalism requires a careful and defensible assessment of privacy rights before publication takes place.