Chris Spray on Friday, December 12, 2003 at 9:42 AM said:-
> I think this is certainly the way the DPA has been "sold" to
> the public at large.
Should the first part of the sentence of paragraph (3) in the Directives
introduction now be put first. Or perhaps the courts are more comfortable
with taking up the challenges presented by abuses of individual privacy
directly, rather than abuses of commercial organisations. I wonder which
area will present the most new case law? It could even be of help to DP and
will certainly be interesting to see the area develop.
Lewis Bourne on Friday, December 12, 2003 at 11:17 AM said:-
> So we'll either have to find another exemption to use, or
> release this type of info to anyone who requested it, whether
> directly involved or not. If the latter, that seems to defy
> the judge's purpose in ruling that way doesn't it? Or am I
> missing something?
The openness of the justice process will certainly be strengthened. But I
suppose that is a cynical perspective which could completely deny offenders
any opportunity to rehabilitate.
Ian W
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|