What factors should be taken into account when setting the amount of a monetary penalty for serious contraventions of data protection and privacy laws? Perhaps surprisingly, our case law has to date had precious little to say on this. The recent decision of the First-Tier Tribunal in LAD Media v IC (EA/2017/0022) is a notable exception. Continue reading
Diary of a Wimpy Minister
A mere three years ago, the FTT held that the Ministerial Diary of Andrew Lansley was relevantly held under FOIA and was not exempt under section 35(1)(b). Now the Court of Appeal has held, in Department of Health v Information Commissioner & Lewis [2017] EWCA Civ 374, that the FTT made no error. The fact that no-one can now remember who Andrew Lansley was (now Lord Lansley CBE thank you) or why anyone would care, is by-the-by. Continue reading
Data Manifest(o)ations
It came as news to us at Panopticon, but apparently there is an election happening. We hadn’t seen anything about it, but obviously our vision, like the election, was not 2020 after all. But not wanting to miss out on the fun (and by fun, we mean limitless repetition of meaningless slogans, the never-ending abuse of BBC reporters for ‘bias’ by everyone, and a slow dawning sense of the end of days not coming soon enough), we thought a quick glance at the main party manifestos would be in order. Continue reading
Medical privacy
Do clinicians treating a patient with Huntington’s Disease have a duty to disclose the diagnosis to the patient’s daughters? Arguably so, says the Court of Appeal in ABC v St George’s Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (2017) EWCA Civ 336.
Huntington’s Disease is inherited. The child of a parent with the disease has a 50 per cent chance of developing the condition.
In the ABC case the Claimant’s father was diagnosed with the condition. He told his brother. He did not inform the Claimant or either of her sisters. Continue reading
EU looks to appoint expert group on the GDPR
Just in case any readers are interested, the EU has announced that it is setting up a ‘multi-stakeholder expert group’ to assist the EU Commission in understanding the potential challenges posed by the application of the GDPR (see here). It is anticipated that the group will consist of academic, legal practitioners, as well as business and civil society representatives. If you or your clients are interested in applying for membership of the group, here’s the relevant link.
Anya Proops QC
Manni From Heaven: The Right to Forget Google Spain
In amongst the unsolicited love letters, the pictures of rudely shaped vegetables and simple abuse from those who believe a section 14 FOIA response is a deliberate conspiracy against them, the Panopticon postbag occasionally receives a polite enquiry about why we have not passed comment upon some fascinating information law development. Such a point might be made about Case C-398/15 Camera di Commercio v Manni (ECLI:EU:C:2017:197), in which the CJEU addressed, for only the second time, the ‘right to be forgotten’. Of course, in this case, we have analysed it at great length, but all well-known search engines have delisted it so thoroughly that everyone has forgotten where to find it. So here, like a vexatious requestor or a particularly unpleasant kebab, we are again. Continue reading