How to remove court records from the internet
Removing court records from the internet can be a tricky process, but it is possible with the right steps.
Removing sex offending history from Google
Example of removal of court records from the internet for a sexual offence
Right to be forgotten and removal of court records
Remove court records from Google under GDPR
Solicitor's thoughts about the case
Removing sex offending history from Google
Google sometimes refuse to honour right-to-be-forgotten requests, making their decisions not so much on facts or legal reasoning as on feelings. This is particularly true when it comes to requests to remove court records from Google in relation to a conviction for sexual offences. The assessors at Google often automatically come to the conclusion that they do not approve of the behaviour of the person who made the right-to-be-forgotten request, and so deny their request.
This could be because they deem the conduct of the individual to be inappropriate or immoral, or it may be because they believe that the individual is trying to hide something that they don't want the public to know about. In any case, it is often a decision made more on emotion than on objective facts. This can be a difficult and frustrating situation to find yourself in, especially if you feel that the assessor's decision was based on a misunderstanding.
Example of removal of court records from the internet for a sexual offence
Simon (not his real name), sought to delete links to articles from Google. Six years ago, he shared an explicit picture of a woman on Facebook when he was intoxicated.
He received a prison sentence which after an appeal to the Court of Appeal was converted to a community service order. Six years later, links to the articles which reported his appeal hearing were still showing on Google searches. This prevented him from moving on with his life. Google refused to delist the articles, citing public interest.
Right to be forgotten and removal of court records
Simon decided to seek help from a law firm to remove the court records from Google searches so that he could move on with his life. Google initially refused to take down the articles, claiming that it was in the public interest to keep them online since they had been written in response to a court case.
However, our lawyers argued back that Google was acting outside of the law by refusing to remove the articles simply because they did not agree with the nature of Simon's conviction. They argued that Google had a legal obligation to remove any content that could be seen as a breach of Simon's right to private life and a breach of his right to fair processing of his data.
They further argued that Google had a responsibility to protect the rights of their customers and that by allowing the articles to remain online, they were failing to meet that responsibility. Our lawyers sent a formal request to Google, asking them to remove links to the articles or face legal action.
Remove court records from Google under GDPR
After a comprehensive GDPR right-to-be-forgotten request was drafted by our expert lawyers, Google agreed to delist most of the URLs. However, there was one article from the Daily Telegraph that they refused to delist at first on the basis that the article was in the public interest because it was posted in a national newspaper.
This argument was flawed since the individual requesting the delisting had a legitimate reason to do so and the article was from several years before and had nothing to do with current events. We argued that the article was out of date and no longer relevant to the current situation, but Google refused to budge. After a lengthy discussion, we managed to convince Google to delist the article and Simon's right to be forgotten was upheld. Having had his privacy violated by the processing of the articles by Google, we felt it was important to protect his anonymity and this was a victory for us all. Simon was finally able to move on with his life without being haunted by his past.
With the help of the law firm, he was able to exercise his right to be forgotten and put the mistake behind him. After months of legal wrangling and discussions with his solicitors, the firm was able to help him get the outcome he desired. Google finally ruled in his favour, and now all traces of his past indiscretion have been erased from the public record. He is now free to start anew, unburdened by the mistakes of his past. As he moves forward, Simon is filled with newfound hope and optimism for the future. He is finally able to turn the page and write a new chapter in his life.
Solicitor's thoughts about the case
It is always a challenge to remove court records from Google. It is not uncommon for Google to make decisions in response to a right-to-be-forgotten request that is based more on emotion than they are on the legal parameters of the situation. Unfortunately, this can lead to a decision that is not in line with the law and may be detrimental to an individual's rights. Such decisions can be difficult to reverse and can potentially cause significant harm. It is therefore essential that Google takes a more objective stance when considering these requests, focusing on the legal parameters of the situation rather than emotion-based decisions.
From a client's perspective, it is important for those whose right-to-be-forgotten applications had been refused by Google to understand that it is well worth the effort to take their case to a higher level and seek legal advice from a firm of solicitors with a speciality in this field. This is especially true if they believe that their right to be forgotten has been unfairly denied. By speaking to a legal expert, they can get an accurate assessment of their case and understand the best course of action to take in order to gain the desired outcome. Taking the case to a firm of solicitors could be the key to success, and it is certainly worth pursuing.
Case studies are based on real cases. We have changed the names, dates and circumstances in relation to those involved in order to protect their identity and to emphasis important aspects of legal issues.
