In a message dated 08/06/04 11:24:47 GMT Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
> Perhaps, post Durant, an email address is not sufficiently "personal". If,
> after all, copies of meeting notes attended by the various participants
> fails the latest test, then just an email address could be insufficient. On
> the other hand, an email containing details of the sender and some juicy
> text may well be different.
>
-------
The Durant decision will not affect this argument. An e-mail address has
sufficient "focus" if it is unique to that individual within that organisation.
"
"[log in to unmask]" is sufficient to identify me whereas
"enquiries@.." is not.
The comments by the CoA (erroneous in my view) were that the file was about
the FSA'a investigation of the complaint into Barclay's bank. Mr Durant's name
on the front of the file was "incidental" in their view. The focus of an
e-mail address is on the (intended) recipient.
Ian Buckland
Ian Buckland
Managing Director
Keep IT Legal Ltd
Please Note: The information given above does not replace or negate the need
for proper legal advice and/or representation. It is essential that you do not
rely upon any advice given without contacting your solicitor. If you need
further explanation of any points raised please contact Keep I.T. Legal Ltd at
the address below:
55 Curbar Curve
Inkersall, Chesterfield
Derbyshire S43 3HP
(Reg 3822335)
Tel: 01246 473999
Fax: 01246 470742
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Website: www.keepitlegal.co.uk
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|