Therefore, the National Labor Court refused to prohibit the publication of the appellant's name in the case there.
Similarly, in National Insurance Institute (National) 58944-09-20 National Insurance Institute v. Anonymous (May 24, 2021) it was held that
"The reason for granting the respondent's request is found in the provision of section 70(d) of the Courts Law (which applies to the labor courts by virtue of section 39 of the Labor Court Law). This section allows the court to prohibit "any publication in connection with the court's deliberations, to the extent it deems it necessary to protect the security of a litigant, a witness or another person whose name was mentioned in the hearing or in order to prevent a serious violation of the privacy of one of them, in order to prevent an infringement of a person's privacy due to the disclosure of medical information about him..." (Emphasis added - A.A.). This section allows for a gag of publication in order to prevent invasion of privacy as a result of the disclosure of medical information. This section (or any other section of the Courts Law) does not have the authority to prohibit publication with the purpose, in and of itself, to prevent damage to one's good name or livelihood or the chance of finding a job... In addition, in the case law of this Court it was determined that section 70(c1) of the Courts Law, on which the Respondent relies, does not apply to proceedings of the type of proceeding in question..."
- In summary, when the courts discussed requests to prohibit the publication of the names of litigants for fear of violating their privacy due to the disclosure of medical information, the rule was established that in civil lawsuits for bodily injury, the publication of the names of the plaintiffs would be prohibited. However, no similar rule has been established regarding appeals against the decisions of the National Insurance Institute's medical committees.
Civil lawsuit for invasion of privacy
- The question of the balance between the violation of privacy and the publicity of the hearing is likely to come to the court's door at two points in the timeline, the first - before the publication, in the framework of a gag order application, and the second - after the publication has already been carried out, in the framework of a monetary claim. The above general discussion dealt with a forward-looking examination of the question of the prohibition on the publication of a party's private details, and the judgments cited above guide the courts on how to balance between the right to privacy and the publicity of the hearing when they come to hear requests for gag of publicity. The precedent established therein does not deal with a retroactive examination of the publication of judgments where a gag order was not issued.
- The monetary claim can be based on the provisions of the Protection of Privacy Law, in which section 4 establishes the right to sue:
"Violation of privacy is a civil tort, and the provisions of the Torts Ordinance [New Version] will apply to it subject to the provisions of this law."