Firstly, under SAR, there is no need to supply ANY duplicates. Once you have given one copy you have complied with the obligation in s7(c)(i). Remember, the right is access to PD, not to specific documents.
So if there is an email trail, between A and B, and if you have a full set from A you can ignore B. Looking at the set from A, if each email includes within it previous emails, because the option to include original with reply is in use*, you can for the same reason simply delete this trail from the disclosure copy. This can significantly reduce the need for multiple redactions of the same text. A bit more complicated if more correspondents are involved but the principle is clear.
Secondly, while it is perhaps a mild customer service concern, following the thread is a matter for them. It will however be easier if you avoid all the duplication.
Clearly for FOI the issue is not so straightforward, even ducking the interesting question of whether an email I send is the same document as that email in the recipients inbox. With FOI you have the possibility that an occasional requester wants all the extraneous metadata. He might even, if a conspiracy addict, want to see a full copy of every email - included the duplicated trail.
In practice however I dealt with many FOI requests where, with agreement of the requester, the matter was dealt with in the same way as described for a SAR. As you suggest they do not need all the duplication. If you explain the situation openly you may save much work - they can always ask for more after first release.
Finally because FOI is also technically about info not documents, you could try the same approach without agreement - providing you explain. As far as I recall there is no formal precedent on this and it may be possible to distinguish it: (a) that it is not the same as those cases where it has been held full info cannot be disclosed without copying the documents or (b), having explained the issue and provided A&A the request may become vexatious if requester insists on you duplicating everything many times over with all the attendant redaction difficulties
* Because of this issue I strongly recommend that this option is never used. If using Outlook you may even be able to do this at a system policy level.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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 https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/subscribers/subscribercommands.html
Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your needs
To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|