It seems that the crux of the case did not turn on any DPA claim, though?
More on the fact that it appeared to Mr Justice Rimer that the case for
damages per se was insufficiently proven
The result of the case is "I dismiss Mr Johnson's (abandoned) claim under
section 10 of the DPA. I dismiss his claim for compensation under section
13. I dismiss his claim that the MDU committed a breach of the fifth data
protection principle. I will hear counsel as to the form of the order I
should make and as to what is to happen to Mr Johnson's claim under section
14 (the Schedule II claim)."
Can someone with formal legal knowledge interpret what precedent, if any, is
set by this case, please?
-----Original Message-----
From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Duncan Smith
Sent: 20 March 2006 11:11
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [data-protection] Durant - Can I ignore it?
For another take on relevant filing systems, don't forget to have a look at
the latest case law as Mr. Paul Johnson takes the Medical Defence Union
(MDU) to the High Court.
Justice Rimer has some interesting points re manual files and microfiche
(they're not covered by DPA), BUT the data they contain has been PROCESSED,
and should therefore be obtained fairly.
It's complex, and for the insomniacs and Sado masochists, here's the full
transcript.
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2006/321.html
Regards,
Duncan Smith
Director
iCompli Limited
Silverstone Innovation Centre | Silverstone Circuit | Northants | NN12 8GX
t: 01327 856 200
t: 08707 70 48 66
f: 01327 856 001
m: 07775 56 81 80
e: [log in to unmask]
Web: www.icompli.co.uk
Travel: Directions to iCompli Ltd.
Compliance in your languageT
-----Original Message-----
From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Graeme Hawley
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 2:16 PM
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)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|