>But the judges in the Durant appeal specifically said that people should
not use >SARs as a way of getting info for litigation purposes.
When delivering internal training I always remind people that exemptions
are measures which are available to us but don't necessarily have to be
used.
In the 21 months since I took over responsibility for SARs we have had
about half a dozen cases where there was a suspicion that the data subject
wanted the information for use in some sort of "action" against the Council
- ranging from possible legal action to arguing that they were receiving a
lower level of service than they were entitled to.
In some of these cases the data subject pursued the complaints procedure at
the same time. However, in no case has it been felt necessary to treat any
of these requests as vexatious. I can imagine that some data controllers
might wish to classify requests as vexatious in similar circumstances but I
would be very suspicious that their motives were to cover up something they
didn't wish to disclose.
I agree with Antoinette and would only classify a SAR as vexatious if it
appeared to be designed solely to cause
inconvenience to the data controller.
Regards,
Graham
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|