Halloween Decision which might spook Lawyers
The case of Emma Brooksbank v The Information Commissioner (Allowed) [2019] UKFTT 2018_0226 (GRC) (31 October 2019) is a case in which the Tribunal decided that legal advice should be disclosed. This was in the context of a request under the Environmental Information Regulations. The key reasoning is at paragraph 35 of the judgement available here
The Tribunal was keen to stress that the conclusion that public interest favoured disclosure was ‘by a fine margin’ and the judgement acknowledges the importance of legal privilege. The Tribunal, as could have been expected, referred to the time elapsed since the advice was given and the precise nature of the public interest in disclosure. However, the most interesting point is the consideration of the nature of the legal advice and I quote from paragraph 35:
‘privilege is less compelling when a public body is seeking advice about general points of law and the advice does not depend on a particular set of facts.’
Covert recording of teachers by pupils or parents
In my solicitor role, I would often be asked about a situation where a pupil or parent had covertly recorded a teacher or teaching assistant. The question was usually 'Is this a data protection issue?' My view on that was 'No'. Why? - Well, because the GDPR does not apply to the processing of personal data by a natural person in the course of a purely personal or household activity. A recent case involving a similar situation - a patient recording a doctor- has come to the same conclusion, meaning that there is now caselaw support for my interpretation of the GDPR. The case is Mustard v. Flower
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2019/2623.html
The ICO, Cookies and Consent
Back in the spring the ICO updated its guidance on cookies and implemented a cookie consent tool in order to comply with its own guidance. Most organisations have not followed suit. Their fears over the effects of compliance may be justified. A recent FOI response from the ICO reveals the marked effect of the consent tool on the analytics data. Presumably a large number of users did not opt in to the analytics cookies. I question whether this effect would be so severe for most organisations, though. ICO website users are probably much more concerned about their personal data than the average member of the public. To see my source of information go to:
https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/our-information/disclosure-log/irq0873632/
Do you know what happens to your personal data?
Extremely interesting and informative article on AdTech on the BBC here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-49495437
Change to Data Protection Law
A recent and significant change to data protection law seems to have gone under the radar. The key point is that it is no longer necessary for an individual to prove pecuniary loss or distress to get compensation under data protection law. In practice, it is of most relevance for class actions. Lawyers wanting to know more can read the case of LLoyd v. Google (on appeal):
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/1599.html