We previously noted on this blog the useful discussion in D v Information Commissioner [2018] UKUT 441 (AAC) of the principles applicable to the anonymity of parties in information rights appeals. But who, no-one asked us, was D? Well, it turns out on appeal that the answer is: Moss v Information Commissioner [2020] EWCA Civ 580. Ta dah! Continue reading →

The CJEU has announced that judgment will be handed down in Case C-311/18, Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland & Schrems on 16 July 2020. The judgment directly concerns the legality of standard contractual clauses in the context of transfers of personal data to the USA, and is also likely to comment on the validity of the Privacy Shield adequacy decision (which came under heavy fire at the hearing) and the role of data protection supervisory authorities in relation to international transfers. The Advocate General’s Opinion was issued in December: (EU:C:2019:1145). 

Christopher Knight

The Access to Health Records Act 1990 is an oft-overlooked member of the information rights family, but it can have a useful role to play. In the case of Re AB [2020] EWHC 691 (Fam) (Re AB) it was important because the applicant was the personal representative seeking the health records of a deceased sibling; precisely the sort of territory to which data protection law does not apply. Continue reading →

There are not many areas of law entirely unaffected by the coronavirus (it comes to something when even wills and trusts starts to look important) but data protection has a place at the vanguard. As the situation continues to develop, there are more and more updates. Here are a collected few. Continue reading →

If you believe that an individual who works with children sexually assaulted you, but was never prosecuted for that allegation, it is understandable that you might wish to know whether that person has been placed on the formal list of persons barred from engaging in regulated activity with children, run by the Disclosure and Barring Service (“DBS”). But it is also understandable why the DBS might not wish to tell you (and thereby the public at large) who is or is not barred, and even more so why the individual accused would not wish that to be revealed. Who’s rights win out? Continue reading →

Anyone who has had a FOIA case in the national security space will have faced the near-impossible task of trying to work out what on earth Corderoy & Ahmed v Information Commissioner & Attorney General & Cabinet Office [2017] UKUT 495 (AAC) means; a front-runner for most impenetrable Upper Tribunal decision on FOIA. Now Judge Markus QC has had a go at squaring the circle in Lownie v Information Commissioner & Foreign and Commonwealth Office & The National Archives [2020] UKUT 32 (AAC). Continue reading →