Google in fight in London court over ‘right to be forgotten’
28 Feb 2018
Google is fighting two businessmen in a London court over whether people have the right to purge old convictions from online search results in the UK's first so-called ''right to be forgotten'' trial.
The businessmen who were not named due to a court order, want Google to remove links about their being found guilty in a false accountancy conspiracy in the late 1990s. Under English law designed to rehabilitate offenders, the conviction does not have to be disclosed to potential employers and can effectively be ignored.
According to Hugh Tomlinson, a lawyer for the complainant, who spoke at a court hearing yesterday, a Google search brings up the information "through a few key strokes," undermining the law about such spent convictions. ''Google facilitates information that would otherwise be hard to find.''
Under a EU top court ruling, Google is required to remove information about a person on request if it is outdated or irrelevant, that set out a right to be forgotten without outlining clear terms for when the search engine should remove information. The search giant is also fighting court cases and privacy regulators across Europe over how far it should go to delete links.
According to the businessmen, the convictions are over a decade old and are legally ''spent'', and that traces of their association with the cases need not continue. However, according to Google, keeping the information available is in the public interest and so should stay.
According to lawyers representing Google, the cases are the first ''right to be forgotten claims'' aired in an English court.''
Barrister Hugh Tomlinson, QC, who is representing one of the businessmen, said the information at the centre of the case was ''spent'' under legislation relating to the rehabilitation of offenders and had become ''private''.
The Independent quoted him as saying, ''There is a strong public policy in favour of the rehabilitation of criminal offenders."
''The claimant has served his sentence and the rehabilitation period has expired.''
