I've noted the comments from others about (a) that the data is not actually
about the Data Subject (plausible argument), and (b) that it's nonsensical
to withhold data the Subject already knows (also plausible). However, it
occurs to me that (b) may not be nonsensical in every case.
Firstly, I can't see anything which says you *must* disclose data if the
Data Subject already knows it. That situation obviously makes it more
likely to be disclosable, but doesn't require disclosure, unless I'm missing
Second, I would distinguish between information which is available to the
Data Subject on the internal e-mail system, and data that they can take away
with them on paper and, presumably, show to other people (who may be legally
privileged, but may just be their mates).
Given that your Data Subject knows who the third party is, I would be
inclined to redact the name, at least, because there is no detriment to the
Data Subject in doing so but there is, at least, a warning that you consider
the name of the third party deserving of protection. They could, of course,
immediately say to their mates "that name they've blanked out is X, Y" but
that would be their choice, not your doing.
So I think there is a good case for redaction.
0116 273 8191
22 Stoughton Drive North, Leicester LE5 5UB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Cooke" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 12:03 PM
Subject: 3rd party data known to SAR applicant
> I'd appreciate any thoughts from all you experienced folk out there on
> Scenario is this. Data subject (staff) makes subject access request.
> Emails to and from the data subject deal with 3rd party disciplinary and
> grievance issues sent to data subject in the course of work. Some of the
> stuff is sensitive data. Question is - should the 3rd party data be
> redacted out in responding to the SAR even though the data subject has
> it and may even still have access to email copies?
> I've taken the view that it is not appropriate or reasonable to leave this
> type of 3rd party data unredacted in supplying copies under SAR even
> the data subject will have seen the material and indeed may have retained
> within a work context.
> Is this the right approach to take in this particular circumstance?
> Grateful for any views on this.
> Ray Cooke
> All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
> available to the world wide web community at large at
> 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
> Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list
> [log in to unmask]
> Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your
> 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)
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
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 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)