One might have thought, following the judgments of the Court of Appeal (noted here) and the Supreme Court (noted here) in R (T) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police [2014] UKSC 35, that there was little left to say about enhanced criminal records certificates (ECRC). After all, the Government had, with moderate grace, gone away after the Court of Appeal loss and drafted a revised set of rules in the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (Exceptions) Order 1975 (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2013 (SI 2013/1198) which sought to better implement the Article 8 ECHR balance between the needs of employers and the need for long-distant misbehaviour not to be a permanent stain. But that thought fatally undervalues the ingenuity of lawyers (as well as the breadth of application of the ECRC regime). Continue reading
Keynote speaker announced at the 11KBW Information law conference: Sir Michael Tugendhat
We are delighted Sir Michael Tugendhat will be delivering the key note address on “Remedies and the Law of Privacy” at this year’s Information Law Conference. Sir Michael was the High Court’s senior media judge from October 2010 until his retirement in June 2014, presiding over a number of high-profile and important cases. Before his appointment to the bench he was a leading practitioner in defamation and media law, and he is the co-author of Tugendhat & Christie: The Law of Privacy and the Media (3rd ed., 2016, forthcoming).
For more details on the Information law conference click here.
EARLY BIRD DISCOUNT – 10% off if you book before 15th February 2016 on both half and full day places.
Employer was entitled to access employee’s private Yahoo! messages (and to sack him)
Employers very often wish to monitor how their employees are using work computing facilities during office hours. They may suspect wrongdoing, such as improper use of confidential client or business information, or accessing material which is prohibited by the employer’s policies. They may be concerned about employees using work facilities – and work time – for personal communications. Can the employer investigate by accessing the employee’s communications without their knowledge? Continue reading
‘Plebgate’ and the protection of journalistic sources
It has been a mixed day for the media’s entanglements with the judiciary. Chris Knight posted earlier today about the unhappy outcome for Mirror Group Newspapers before the Court of Appeal in the Gulati privacy damages litigation arising from phone-hacking.
News Group Newspapers, however – together with Sun journalist claims Tom Newton Dunn, Anthony France and Craig Woodehouse – had a happier outcome in another case about telephone privacy, though this time with the media as victim rather than perpetrator of the interference.
Judgment IPT/14/176/H saw the claimants succeed in part in their claim against the Metropolitan Police in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (‘IPT’). Continue reading
Fees in the GRC: Apocalyse Postponed
One of the more popular posts Panopticon has been responsible for was alerting people to an MoJ consultation proposal to introduce fees for all cases in the General Regulatory Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal. That includes appeals against DPA information, enforcement and monetary penalty notices, and appeals against Information Commissioner decision notices under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.
A mass campaign was orchestrated by the Campaign for Freedom of Information which generated over 40,000 responses opposing fees for FOIA appeals. Continue reading
Dransfield and the Supreme Court: Game Over
By way of brief update, Panopticon has learned that the Supreme Court has refused Mr Dransfield permission to appeal against the Court of Appeal’s judgment concerning vexatious requests under section 14(1) FOIA. This represents the end of that important piece of litigation. The Supreme Court also ruled that the issue of European law raised in the application for permission was “irrelevant”. It is unclear from the refusal of permission what that issue was, or what it could have been in the circumstances.
Christopher Knight