In a message dated 19/04/04 11:46:47 GMT Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
> Is this really the case? The majority of the offences listed at Regulation
> 115 deal with contraventions by particular bodies which have been supplied
> with copies for particular uses and the offence occurs (basically) when
> another use is made of the information or it is passed on. The offences
> relating to inspection - i.e. 7(4), 97(4) and 99(5) - only occur if someone
> makes copies of part of the register or records any particulars within it
> other than by means of hand-written notes. There is no mention (that I can
> see) of any restriction on the purpose for which the hand-written notes are
> taken - but I'll be happy to be corrected if I've missed something.
------
That may well be the case in the legislation but the common law situation
with regard the use of the data (Robertson) - with reference to section 11 of the
DPA and the free vote part of the Human Rights legislation is likely to
affect any decision on the further use of the voting register. The UK is in a
unique situation with regards the public availability of the voters' register and
is unlikely to want to have another case go to the Euro courts.
The court held in the Robertson case with respect to using the register for
marketing:
* This was in breach of Section 11 of the Data Protection Act 1998, which
gives an individual the right to object to his personal data being processed
for the purpose of direct marketing. **It mattered not that the ERO would not be
the one using the data as long as he knew or anticipated that anyone buying
the register is going to use it in this way.** (My emphasis)
* The 2001 Regulations have to be read to give effect to section 11 and
also the EU Data Protection Directive which talks about the right to opt out.
Where there is any inconsistency the Directive and the Act take precedence.
* The court also said the at the supply of the information to commercial
organisations without a right to opt out was a breach of the right to privacy
and the right to free elections contrary to the Human Rights Act 1998.
So it is understandable, given the first point, that some EROs will consider
allowing access to parts of the register that do not relate to the individual
may well breach either the Act and/or the Directive.
It is also likely to affect any council that sells their planning list.
Ian
Ian Buckland
Managing Director
Keep IT Legal Ltd
Please Note: The information given above does not replace or negate the need
for proper legal advice and/or representation. It is essential that you do not
rely upon any advice given without contacting your solicitor. If you need
further explanation of any points raised please contact Keep I.T. Legal Ltd at
the address below:
55 Curbar Curve
Inkersall, Chesterfield
Derbyshire S43 3HP
(Reg 3822335)
Tel: 01246 473999
Fax: 01246 470742
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Website: www.keepitlegal.co.uk
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
