WordPress + Bootstrap

So if you, like me, were wondering whatever happened to Mr Kennedy’s case against the Charity Commission, wonder no longer. It turns out that last December the European Court of Human Rights decided to dismiss Mr Kennedy’s Article 10 claim on the ground that it was inadmissible by reason of the availability of an alternative remedy – see the judgment here.

The background, as you may recall, is that Mr Kennedy, a Times journalist, was trying to get information out of the Charity Commission in connection with the ‘Mariam Appeal’, a fund set up by George Galloway MP for the purposes of supporting Iraqi children suffering from leukaemia. Mr Kennedy wanted to get hold of the information in connection with an investigation he was conducting into whether monies Continue reading →

A huge thank you to everyone who attended our sell out Information Law Conference today. It was great to see so many people. A big thank you to Sir Patrick Elias who did a fabulous job chairing the event and our brilliant speakers. Looking forward to next year’s conference already!

We all love nuggets, be they of gold or chicken. A couple of short recent Upper Tribunal judgments reached under FOIA may not be finger-lickin’ good, but are nonetheless worthy noting as a tasty morsel or two. Continue reading →

Information notices have so rarely surfaced in information rights litigation that I can almost hear a number of Panopticon readers saying ‘what is an information notice again?’. Fair question. Continue reading →

To what extent is an individual potentially on the hook, in terms of data protection liabilities, for material they post on their personal social media accounts, such as video clips on YouTube? The CJEU’s ruling in Sergejs Buivids (Case C–345/17) is the most recent addition to the line of authorities about the intersection between personal use of online networks, potential journalistic purposes and data protection duties. Continue reading →

If you think you understand how the DPA 2018 has implemented EU law in the shape of the GDPR (Part 1) and the Law Enforcement Directive (“LED”) (Part 3), and that is that, you may want to think again. What the DPA does not just depend on the language and the Part, but may also require consideration of the scope of EU law. R (El Gizouli) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWHC 60 (Admin) is such a case. Indeed, it is the first decided case of significance to consider the DPA 2018 at all. Continue reading →