Tim Turner wrote:
> I think that the simple answer to this question is yes, you can ignore
> Durant and you would not be alone if you did.
>
> If you wanted to justify why, you could say that the Court of Appeal
> decision is probably not in line with the EU Directive, that the EU were
What I am about to say is NOT professional advice, and I do not profess
special skill, but I think this is absolutely NOT an option for any
government department or 'emanation of the state' (Marshall v
Southampton Area Health Authority, Foster v British Gas.)
> taking action against the UK for not implementing the DPA properly as a
> result, that the UK Government department responsible for Data Protection
> has apparently said that Durant need only apply in similar situations, and
If the UK has not implemented the DP Directive properly, the Directive
is designed to give rights to implementation has passed, THEN the
Directive itself overrides the English Law. (Van Gend en Loos v Dutch
Tax Office). If you are a state body, the directive can be directly
used against you in English Law. This is known as Direct Effect.
If you are not an emanation of the state, the wronged party cannot sue
you (Faccini Dori v RECREB) but CAN sue the Government for any losses
caused thereby. (Francovich v Italy.
EU Law is a wonderful minefield . . .
Nigel
> more than anything, you can justify it on the basis that it's good manners
> and good customer service.
>
> Tim Turner
> Wigan Council
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Graeme Hawley [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 16 March 2006 14:16
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [data-protection] Durant - Can I ignore it?
>
> Sorry to bring up Durant again.
>
> I think that I have understood that Durant allows a data contoller to take a
> very narrow definition of relevant paper filing systems (leaving aside the
> FOI affected public authorities for the minute). But does Durant stop a
> Data Contoller from applying a broader definition if they so wish. In other
> words, just because Durant allows the pusillanimous organisation the
> opportunity to discount folders with names on (but sinfully arranged in
> chronological order - what's that all about?), does the Durant ruling mean
> that a sturdier organisation is forbidden to go that gruelling extra mile,
> and, for example, fish out an individuals personnel file from the
> alphabetically arranged sequence of names in response to that individual's
> request for access.
>
> As it happens, I work for a public authority so am covered by FOISA and its
> wider definition of relevant filing system anyway. Ironically, we do hold
> information which I would like to apply a narrower definition to, but FOISA
> means we cant. We hold upwards of 50 million pages of manuscripts in our
> library collection, many of which contain personal data. Despite the best
> efforts of our staff to catalogue these, my guess is that they would more
> than classify as unstructured data not held in a relevant filing system.
> But because of FOISA, they are covered by access legislation, and all of the
> various problems this creates (such as the theoretical possibility that we
> may have to spend an unlimited amount of time and resources searching for
> the existance of a persons name in tens of thousands of paper documents -
> remembering that the FOISA charging structure does not include time spent
> establishing whether the information is held or not).
>
> Is it me?
>
>
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
> Any queries about sending or receiving message please send to the list owner
>
>
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
> (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
>
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
> the system manager.
>
> This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
> MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses using Sophos
> anti-virus software.
>
> www.mimesweeper.com
> www.sophos.com
> **********************************************************************
>
>
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
> Any queries about sending or receiving message please send to the list owner
>
>
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
> (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
>
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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
Any queries about sending or receiving message please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|