A potentially interesting judgment was handed down orally this morning by Tipples J, rejecting an application from a former Labour Party official to force the Labour Party to disclose the identity of those it believed leaked an internal report concerning the Party’s approach to antisemitism and the conduct of various officials. The Applicant, Ms Oldknow, whose data was contained in the leaked report, wished to uncover the identities of those individuals in order to bring proceedings against them. Continue reading →

As had been trailed for a couple of days, on 19 February 2021, the European Commission formally announced that it had launched the procedure for the adoption of two adequacy decisions for transfers of personal data to the United Kingdom, under the GDPR and the Law Enforcement Directive. The draft decisions have been published here. The draft decisions will be considered by the European Data Protection Board, and then a committee of Member State representatives. The European Parliament has plays an active role in scrutinising the Commission’s approach and, of course, any decision adopted can (and doubtless will) be the subject of legal challenge, ultimately before the CJEU. There is some way to go yet, but at this first stage the Commission has accepted the general proposition that as the UK has retained EU data protection law, it provides in principle an adequate level of protection (albeit over 88 and 51 pages respectively). Much food for thought.

Christopher Knight

Not infrequently in the Tribunals an issue will arise about the handling of documents or evidence disclosed in the course of an information rights appeal, in a context where the GRC and UT Rules do not contain an equivalent to CPR r.31.22. Some useful guidance has now been given from the Upper Tribunal in DVLA v Information Commissioner & Williams [2020] UKUT 310 (AAC). Continue reading →

Two recent judgments of the civil courts which touch upon data protection concerns warrant brief note. The first concerns the confidential nature of redactions in subject access request disclosures, and the second concerns disclosure obligations in civil litigation attaching to the personal devices of former employees. Continue reading →

The Ministry of Justice has published consultation proposals for reforms to how cases progress from the Upper Tribunal to the Court of Appeal. The consultation paper can be found here. Although apparently driven by cases from the Immigration and Asylum Chamber, the proposals will apply to all Chambers of the Upper Tribunal and so will, of course, encompass information rights cases in the Administrative Appeals Chamber. Continue reading →

You have to admire the ingenuity of lawyers. Who would have thought that the GDPR could be a tool to try and force the Home Office to allow a deported overstayer with a lengthy criminal record back into the UK to conduct an in-person appeal? Not the Court of Appeal for a start in Johnson v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] EWCA Civ 1032. Continue reading →