Carole
Your case is uncannily similar to a recent high court case, in which a
local authority reported concerns about a social work student to the
university at which she was studying social work. She took action for
breach of confidence, but the court held the disclosure was not a
breach of confidence as it was in the public interest that unsuitable
persons should not become social workers.
The summary of the case, from Lawtel, is below.
Maurice
Maurice Frankel
Director, Campaign for Freedom of Information
Suite 102, 16 Baldwins Gardens
London EC1N 7RJ, UK
020 7831 7477
www.cfoi.org.uk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
HELEN MADDOCK v DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL (2003)
QBD (HH Judge Reid QC) 13/8/2003
It was in the public interest that unsuitable persons should not become
social workers and it was not a breach of confidence for a local
authority to disclose information in the claimant's family social work
files to a university at which the claimant had obtained a place to
study to become a social worker.
Claim for damages for breach of confidentiality, allegedly negligent
misstatements and infringement of Art.8 of the European Convention on
Human Rights arising from the disclosure of information in the family
social work files relating to the claimant ('M'). The defendant ('the
council') had disclosed information extracted from the files to a
university at which M had obtained a place to study to become a social
worker. The allegedly negligent misstatements were contained in letters
to the university and were said to give an unfair and misleading
impression of M in relation to her parenting skills and her fitness to
be a social worker. The council accepted that there was an obligation
of confidentiality in respect of the files, but argued that the
disclosure of the information was necessary in the public interest. The
council was concerned about M's fitness to be a social worker given
that social services had been involved in the upbringing of M's son
('S') almost since his birth. S had exhibited considerable signs of
disturbance during his childhood and M had refused to accept any
responsibility for his difficulties. His name was eventually placed on
the child protection register on the basis of emotional abuse. The
council later refused to withdraw its communications. As a result of
the council's disclosure, the university removed M from the course
after conducting its own inquiry and giving M an opportunity to put her
case.
HELD: (1) The report and letters sent to the university by the council
were not negligent or unfair. (2) In making its disclosure to the
university, the council owed a duty of care to M to ensure the accuracy
of the matters disclosed. It was just and reasonable to impose such a
duty on the council given that it was aware that the university should
act on the information disclosed to it and that the result might well
be M's exclusion from her course. There was no reason why a public duty
to make a disclosure should be inconsistent with a private duty to the
subject of the disclosure to ensure the accuracy of the matters
disclosed. (3) The fact that the report on M's involvement with social
services and the two letters sent to the university by the council were
not negligent or unfair did not go to whether the council had breached
its duty of confidence to M. It was no defence to a breach of
confidence claim that the information disclosed was true. (4) The
primary obligation lay on the council to decide whether or not to make
the disclosure and there was no requirement for it to obtain a ruling
from the court before doing so. In general, as a matter of good
practice, before making a disclosure in a case such as the present, a
party in the council's position should inform the subject of the
disclosure of that intention in enough time to enable that person to
seek an injunction from the courts. In the present case the council's
decision not to do so could be justified on the evidence as a social
work decision. Even if that decision was a breach of good practice, it
did not create a breach of the duty of confidence. (5) The council's
disclosure was not a disproportionate reaction to the perceived
problem. It was proper for the council to draw the university's
attention to its concerns so that the university could make its own
decision. It was a matter of public interest that unsuitable persons
should not become social workers. The council had properly considered
whether to make disclosure of the information. There was no breach of
confidence in making the disclosures contained in the report and its
cover letter. The second letter was a natural follow-up to the
university's response and no breach of confidence was occasioned by the
failure to make a separate decision on whether it should have been
written. (6) There was no infringement of M's rights under Art.8 of the
Convention.
Claim dismissed.
On 3 Dec 2003, at 17:53, Carole Moreland wrote:
> Advice wanted please. The ICO thought we might be able to disclose
> because
> of 'the public interest' but were not prepared to commit to this and
> thought
> we should take legal advice before making a decision. Before we ask
> our
> legal advisors I would like to be aware of possible options. Has
> anyone
> been involved in a similar situation?
>
> A former social work student, working as an unqualified worker in
> disability
> support, was recognised by a member of the University staff as an
> individual, whose placement (working with the disabled) was terminated
> by
> the employer because of a complaint made of sexual harassment against
> the
> student in connection with a disabled client. An internal disciplinary
> hearing found the accusation proven and a formal written warning was
> issued.
> The student however withdrew from the course. We do not know if the
> employer is aware of this history. Do we disclose this history to the
> local
> authority? If so, what section(s) of the Act justify this disclosure?
>
> Carole
>
> Carole Moreland
> Assistant Director
> Learning Resources
> Library Building
> University of Northumbria at Newcastle
> Ellison Place
> Newcastle Upon Tyne
> NE1 8ST
>
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
