Your Photography Rights in Public Spaces: A UK Journalist's Legal Guide

The General Right to Photograph in Public

There is no law in the UK that prevents you from taking photographs in a public place. This right is supported by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of expression), which is incorporated into UK law through the Human Rights Act 1998. The Metropolitan Police, the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC), and the Home Office have all issued guidance confirming that photography in public places is not in itself unlawful.

This means you are free to photograph:

• Public streets, parks, squares, and open spaces
• Buildings, landmarks, and public infrastructure (including from the outside)
• People in public places (with certain caveats around privacy, discussed below)
• Police officers and other public servants carrying out their duties in public
• Incidents, accidents, and newsworthy events taking place in public view

Human Rights Act 1998: Article 10 and Photography

The cornerstone of press photography rights in the UK is Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, given domestic legal force by the Human Rights Act 1998. Article 10 protects freedom of expression, which the courts and the European Court of Human Rights have consistently interpreted to include the right to gather and communicate information through images. The Act requires all public authorities — including the police — to act compatibly with Convention rights. An officer who prevents a journalist from taking photographs of a newsworthy event in a public place without legal justification is acting in breach of the photographer's Article 10 rights.

Article 10 rights are not absolute: they can be limited where restrictions are “prescribed by law” and “necessary in a democratic society” for purposes including national security, public safety, and the protection of the rights of others. However, any restriction must be proportionate. A blanket ban on all photography near a public building, or a demand that a journalist delete photographs of a lawful protest, is unlikely to pass the proportionality test. Journalists who believe their Article 10 rights have been violated can complain to the IOPC, bring a civil claim under the HRA, or contact the NUJ legal team for initial advice.

Police Interference and Section 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000

One of the most common problems faced by press photographers is interference from police officers. Despite clear guidance to the contrary, some officers continue to stop photographers, demand they delete images, or claim that photography near certain buildings is prohibited under terrorism legislation.

Here is what the law actually says:

• Section 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000 gives police the power to stop and search a person whom they “reasonably suspect” of being a terrorist. This power does not make photography itself an offence, and simply taking photographs cannot in itself constitute reasonable suspicion of terrorism.
• Section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 makes it an offence to collect or make a record of information “likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism.” However, a defence is available if you can show a “reasonable excuse” — and journalism is widely recognised as a reasonable excuse.
• Officers cannot demand you delete photographs. There is no legal power for police to require deletion of images, and doing so could constitute destruction of evidence or an unlawful interference with your Article 10 rights.

Private Land and Quasi-Public Spaces

The right to photograph in public does not extend to private land. Property owners and occupiers have the right to prohibit photography on their premises and to ask you to leave if you refuse to comply. If you refuse to leave private property when asked, you may be committing trespass (a civil wrong) or, if you cause alarm or distress, potentially a criminal offence.

Be aware of “quasi-public” spaces — areas that feel public but are privately owned:

• Shopping centres: Most are private property and can enforce no-photography policies.
• Railway stations: Network Rail allows photography for personal use but may restrict press photography without permission.
• Hospitals and NHS premises: Photography requires permission from the trust and consent from any patients or staff depicted.
• Government buildings: Many have specific restrictions. MOD property, for example, has particular sensitivities.

However, even on private land, if a story involves a genuine public interest, the journalism exemption under the Data Protection Act 2018 and Article 10 ECHR may provide a defence. The test is always whether the intrusion is proportionate to the public interest served.

GDPR, Data Protection, and Street Photography

Photographs of identifiable individuals constitute personal data under the UK GDPR. However, the journalism exemption in Section 26 of the Data Protection Act 2018 provides that processing of personal data for journalistic purposes is exempt from many GDPR requirements where:

• The processing is undertaken with a view to publication of journalistic material
• The data controller reasonably believes publication would be in the public interest
• Compliance with the GDPR provision in question would be incompatible with the journalistic purpose

For day-to-day street photography in the course of news reporting, this exemption provides substantial protection. But it is not a blanket licence. You should still consider whether publication of a particular photograph is proportionate, necessary, and justified by a legitimate journalistic purpose. The IPSO Editors' Code (Clause 2, Privacy) provides the ethical framework.

Photographing Children (IPSO Clause 6)

There is no law that specifically prohibits photographing children in public places. However, this is an area where ethical and regulatory obligations impose significant constraints on journalists:

• IPSO Code, Clause 6: All pupils should be free to complete their time at school without unnecessary intrusion. Journalists must not interview or photograph children under 16 on matters involving their welfare without the consent of a parent or similarly responsible adult.
• Court proceedings: Automatic reporting restrictions apply to children involved in youth court proceedings, family court proceedings, and certain other cases. Publishing a photograph that would identify a child subject to such restrictions is a criminal offence.
• General best practice: Even where photography is legally permissible, consider the potential impact on the child. Would a reasonable person consider the photograph intrusive? Is there a genuine public interest that justifies publication?

Court Buildings and Precincts

Photography and filming within court buildings is a criminal offence under Section 41 of the Criminal Justice Act 1925 and Section 9 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981. This prohibition extends to:

• The courtroom itself
• Corridors, hallways, and other areas within the court building
• The court precincts (the area immediately surrounding the court building, the exact extent of which can vary)

However, you are permitted to photograph people entering or leaving a court building from a public road or pavement, provided you are not within the court precincts. Photographs taken from the public highway of defendants, witnesses, or lawyers arriving at court are a longstanding and legitimate part of court reporting. For a broader overview of court reporting obligations, see our court reporting guide and our article on contempt of court rules.

Photographing Protests and Public Order Events

Protests and demonstrations are among the most important events for press photographers to document, and the right to do so is strongly protected under Articles 10 and 11 of the ECHR. However, these are also situations where interference is most likely. Key points to remember:

• You are not required to stop filming or photographing during a protest, even if police ask you to. Policing guidance explicitly states that officers should not prevent media from covering protests.
• Dispersal orders under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 may be used by police to clear an area. Journalists are not automatically exempt, but press card holders should identify themselves and explain they are covering the event. In practice, most forces will accommodate working journalists.
• Section 35 directions to leave an area can apply to anyone in the designated zone, but again, working journalists should identify themselves and assert their right to report.
• Safety: Protests can become unpredictable. Carry your press card, have your editor's contact details accessible, and review our journalist safety at UK protests guide before covering live events.

Social-Media Reposting and Copyright

A photograph taken by a press photographer is protected by copyright from the moment of creation under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. The copyright belongs to the photographer unless they are employed and the image was taken in the course of employment, in which case the employer normally owns it. Crucially, posting a copyrighted press photograph on social media without permission infringes copyright even if you add attribution — a credit line does not substitute for a licence.

When third parties — including other news outlets, campaign groups, or members of the public — repost your images on social media, they may be infringing your copyright. The “fair dealing” exception under section 31 of the 1988 Act permits use of copyrighted images for reporting current events, but this defence requires attribution and applies only to genuine news use. Embedding a tweet that contains your photograph may or may not constitute infringement depending on the platform's terms — this is a live legal question in UK courts.

Conversely, when you wish to use an image found on social media in a news report, do not assume it is free to use. Even user-generated content (UGC) is subject to copyright. Best practice is to contact the original uploader, obtain permission in writing, provide attribution, and in some cases agree a licence fee. The NUJ and BPPA both publish guidance on UGC licensing.

Practical Steps to Protect Yourself

Knowing your rights is essential, but so is being prepared to assert them calmly and professionally. Here are practical steps every UK press photographer should take:

1. Carry your press card — a recognised UK press card (NUJ, NCTJ, or employer-issued) is the quickest way to identify yourself as a working journalist.
2. Know the key legislation — familiarise yourself with the Terrorism Act 2000, the Criminal Justice Act 1925, and the relevant IPSO/NUJ code provisions.
3. Keep notes — if challenged, record the time, location, the name and number of any officer involved, and the stated reason for the interference.
4. Do not delete images under pressure — there is no legal basis for police or security to demand this.
5. Report incidents — notify your editor, the NUJ, and if appropriate, file a complaint with the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).
6. Stay updated — the law evolves. Follow NUJ bulletins and legal updates from organisations like the Media Lawyers Association.

For more on handling legal challenges in your work, see our guide to legal threats facing UK journalists and our overview of defamation law for journalists.

Practical Checklist

Use this before and during any assignment that involves photography in potentially contested spaces:

• Carry your NUJ, CIoJ or employer press card at all times when working
• Identify whether your shooting location is genuinely public land or privately owned “quasi-public” space
• Note the officer's name, collar number, and the legal power cited if stopped by police
• Do not delete images under pressure — there is no legal power requiring you to do so
• Where children appear in images, check IPSO Clause 6 and any active reporting restrictions before publishing
• Confirm you are outside the court precinct before photographing arrivals at a court building
• Archive all published photographs and retain the originals — do not rely solely on the publication's servers
• When using third-party UGC, contact the original poster and obtain written permission before publishing
• Report any unlawful interference with your photography to the NUJ and, if warranted, to the IOPC
• Review NPCC media guidance and NUJ photographers' rights cards annually for updates

Common Mistakes

• Assuming all open spaces are public land: Many squares, precincts, and “public” areas in UK cities are privately owned and can lawfully prohibit photography.
• Deleting images when told to: No officer or security guard has a legal power to require deletion. Deleting destroys evidence and may prejudice any subsequent complaint or legal action.
• Conflating Section 43 stop-and-search with a photography ban: Section 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000 allows a search if there is reasonable suspicion of terrorism — it does not make photography an offence, and photography alone cannot constitute that suspicion.
• Photographing inside court buildings: Even hallways and waiting areas inside court buildings fall under the Section 41 Criminal Justice Act 1925 prohibition. The safe zone is the public pavement outside the precinct.
• Publishing UGC without permission: Social-media users own the copyright to their own photographs. Embedding or reposting without a licence can result in a claim.
• Ignoring IPSO Clause 6 for school events: Photographing children at a school sports day or prize ceremony without parental consent — even on a public road outside — can breach IPSO standards if the image reveals welfare-sensitive information.
• Believing a “no photography” sign creates a criminal offence: A private landowner can enforce their rules by requiring you to leave, but breach of a sign is a civil, not criminal, matter.

Red Flags to Watch For

• An officer citing “Section 44” of the Terrorism Act 2000 — this power was ruled incompatible with the ECHR by the European Court in Gillan and Quinton v UK (2010) and has been abolished; its use is unlawful
• Security staff claiming that a public street or pavement is “private property” — verify land ownership before accepting this claim
• A demand to hand over your memory card or phone — this would constitute theft or unlawful seizure of property and should be refused calmly
• Police cordoning off a protest area in a way that systematically excludes all press without individual justification
• A publication or editor instructing you to use a third-party image without verifying the copyright position
• A subject threatening an injunction to prevent publication of a photograph taken in a public place — take immediate legal advice before agreeing to any undertaking

Primary Sources

• Human Rights Act 1998, Schedule 1 (Article 10) — legislation.gov.uk
• Terrorism Act 2000, Section 43 — stop and search powers; legislation.gov.uk
• Criminal Justice Act 1925, Section 41 — prohibition on court photography; legislation.gov.uk
• Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 — copyright in photographs; legislation.gov.uk
• Data Protection Act 2018, Section 26 — journalism exemption; legislation.gov.uk
• NUJ Photographers' Rights Guide — practical guidance on police powers and deletion demands
• IPSO Editors' Code of Practice — Clause 2 (Privacy) and Clause 6 (Children)
• British Press Photographers' Association (BPPA) — resources including police engagement guidance
• NPCC Media Relations Guidance — police guidance on facilitating press coverage