Has anyone taken advice on the weight to be attached to 'necessary'
in 35(2) and elsewhere? ie the disclosure must 'necessary' for the
purpose of legal proceedings, or legal advice.This must be a more
demanding test than 'helpful' or 'desirable'....
Maurice Frankel
Campaign for Freedom of Information
At 9:31 am +0100 12/9/01, Stuart Lynch wrote:
>I have also been asked to advise on this issue and I must admit I found
>myself asking "is it me?" when people were saying that Section 35(2) only
>applied when the data subject was the solicitor's client. The equivalent
>section of the 1984 Act, Section 34(5)(b), allowed such disclosures ony in
>situations "in which the person making the disclosure is a party or a
>witness". Section 35(2), by removing this condition, throws the whole thing
>wide open and allows disclosures in any circumstances where the information
>is needed for legal proceedings or obtaining legal advice, bearing in mind
>that, as Paul points out, compliance with any such request is at the
>discretion of the data controller, unless a court order is obtained in which
>case Section 35(1) will apply.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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 : -
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/user-manual/summary-user-commands.htm
all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|