Oliver Butler: Elgizouli v Secretary of State for the Home Department: The Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of the Data Subject – UK Constitutional Law Association

‘Many will no doubt pore over the Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Elgizouli v Secretary of State for the Home Department to evaluate its significance for the common law constraint of prerogative power. Ultimately, however, the Supreme Court held that it was not the common law but rather a failure by the Home Secretary to consider his duties under the Data Protection Act 2018 that rendered the decision in question unlawful. This post considers the significance of the Data Protection Act 2018 for protecting the fundamental rights and freedoms of data subjects. Although the narrow ground upon which the judgment was decided will offer some procedural protections for fundamental rights and freedoms, the case’s significance lies in its suggestion as to how data protection law might offer some scope for extending the extraterritorial application of human rights beyond the limits of the European Convention on Human Rights.’

Full Story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 17th April 2020

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org

Rowing back on vicarious liability – Law Society’s Gazette

‘Two judgments from the Supreme Court have set restrictions on the scope of vicarious liability. In Barclays Bank v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 13 the test was whether the tortfeasor was in fact the ‘employee’ of the employer. The claimants alleged that they had suffered sexual abuse by a GP hired by the bank to carry out medical assessments of employees.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 20th April 2020

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Morrison: It May Not Be Over Yet: Vicarious Liability Explained by the Supreme Court (Liability of Joint Controllers Unaffected) – The 36 Group

‘In Morrison the Supreme Court was at pains to re-state and explain a previous judgment on an employer’s vicarious liability for employees that had been misinterpreted and misapplied both at trial and in the Court of Appeal. What was not examined at any level was the primary liability of joint data controllers, as regulated by the General Data Protection Regulation. This article looks at what the Supreme Court said about vicarious liability and the position of joint controllers.’

Full Story

The 36 Group, 14th April 2020

Source: 36group.co.uk

Vicarious Liability – the move is over – Hailsham Chambers

‘On 1 April 2020, the Supreme Court handed down judgment in two conjoined Vicarious Liability cases: WM Morrisons Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 12 and Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 13. In this article, Michael Patrick reviews those judgments and considers their impact on the law of Vicarious Liability.’

Full Story

Hailsham Chambers, 9th April 2020

Source: www.hailshamchambers.com

Workchain: unauthorised data access is a serious offence for companies and their officers – Henderson Chambers

‘As the Coronavirus causes unprecedented and rapid change in our daily lives and many of us get used to the challenges of remote working, it is a good time to remind clients of the recent CoA decision in R. (on the application of Pensions Regulator) v Workchain Ltd [2019] EWCA Crim 1422 which demonstrates the wide application of the Computer Misuse Act 1990 (“CMA”). The case serves as a stark warning for companies and their officers who are not taking data security seriously. Tim Green was instructed by The Pensions Regulator (“TPR”).’

Full Story

Henderson Chambers, 3rd April 2020

Source: 3yf6pp3bqg8c3rycgf1gbn9w-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com

Wm Morrison Supermarkets Plc v Various Claimants & Barclays Bank Plc v Various Claimants – Old Square Chambers

‘The Supreme Court has handed down two new judgments addressing the legal limits of vicarious liability in employment and non-employment cases.’

Full Story

Old Square Chambers, April 2020

Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk

On The Move – Ropewalk Chambers

‘On the inauspicious April Fool’s Day, the Supreme Court brought a stop to the expanding course of the law of vicarious liability in two decisions which bear careful consideration and will have a significant impact on the scope for liability in the law of tort generally, beyond the particular contexts of sexual abuse and data protection litigation.’

Full Story

Ropewalk Chambers, 14th April 2020

Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk

Lifting The Lockdown: Is A Phone App The Answer? – Each Other

‘With the UK’s coronavirus lockdown extended for three more weeks, some people are looking towards a planned NHS phone app as “holding the key” to easing restrictions. But how realistic is this expectation and could there be unexpected consequences? EachOther examines.’

Full Story

Each Other, 16th April 2020

Source: eachother.org.uk

Data Protection in the Age of COVID-19 – Thomas More Chambers

Posted April 17th, 2020 in chambers articles, coronavirus, data protection, news by sally

‘During the COVID-19 pandemic, much concern has focussed on the impact on public health and the economy. Most people would understandably place data protection lower down on their priorities. It has become clear, however, that the pandemic has prompted a variety of legal concerns in this area.’

Full Story

Thomas More Chambers, 14th April 2020

Source: www.thomasmore.co.uk

Information watchdog sets out its regulatory approach during COVID-19 – Local Government Lawyer

Posted April 17th, 2020 in coronavirus, data protection, freedom of information, news, ombudsmen, privacy by sally

‘The Information Commissioner’s Office has issued a statement setting out its regulatory approach during the coronavirus pandemic, saying it will focus on those areas likely to cause the greatest public harm.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 16th April 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Government acted unlawfully in assisting USA to prosecute IS fighter — an extended look – UK Human Rights Blog

‘Since signing the Sixth Protocol to the European Convention in 1999, the UK has refused to extradite or deport persons to countries where they are facing criminal charges that carry the death penalty.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 14th April 2020

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Vicarious liability – ‘on the move’ no longer – Parklane Plowden

‘For the last 20 years the boundaries of vicarious liability have expanded. In this article Roger Quickfall discusses how the Supreme Court has brought much needed clarity.’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden, 7th April 2020

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

WM Morrison Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants – Supreme Court clarifies the test for vicarious liability – 12 King’s Bench Walk

‘In a much-anticipated decision, the Supreme Court addresses the scope of an employer’s vicarious liability for acts by its employees, in particular the “misunderstandings” that have arisen since its previous landmark decision in Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc [2016] UKSC 11.’

Full Story

12 King's Bench Walk, 2nd April 2020

Source: www.12kbw.co.uk

El Gizouli: Mutual Legal Assistance Meets Data Protection – Oxford Human Rights Hub

‘On 25 March 2020, the UK Supreme Court issued R (El Gizouli) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] UKSC 10. Due to the COVID-19 global pandemic, this was the court’s first judgment to be handed down remotely. It confirmed the importance of data protection laws to international transfers of personal information for law enforcement purposes and may have even broader ramifications.’

Full Story

Oxford Human Rights Hub, 13th April 2020

Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk

Vicarious liability (and data protection): two cases – Six Pump Court

‘Morrisons, heard recently in the Supreme Court, concerns vicarious liability for a rogue data controller. Together with another Supreme Court case, Barclays Bank, these two cases cover all the key issues.’

Full Story

Six Pump Court, 8th April 2020

Source: www.6pumpcourt.co.uk

Another skirmish on the boundaries of vicarious liability: data protection this time – UK Human Rights Blog

‘This appeal concerned the circumstances in which an employer can be held to be vicariously liable for wrongs committed by its employees, and also whether vicarious liability may arise for breaches by an employee of duties imposed by the Data Protection Act 1998 (“DPA”).’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 7th April 2020

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

The Non-Disclosure and Barring Service: Victim Access to Information – Panopticon

‘If you believe that an individual who works with children sexually assaulted you, but was never prosecuted for that allegation, it is understandable that you might wish to know whether that person has been placed on the formal list of persons barred from engaging in regulated activity with children, run by the Disclosure and Barring Service (“DBS”). But it is also understandable why the DBS might not wish to tell you (and thereby the public at large) who is or is not barred, and even more so why the individual accused would not wish that to be revealed. Who’s rights win out?’

Full Story

Panopticon, 8th April 2020

Source: panopticonblog.com

EP 106: Vicarious Liability – Robert Kellar QC & Isabel McArdle – Law Pod UK

‘Robert Kellar QC and Isabel McArdle of 1 Crown Office Row discuss with Rosalind English the latest Supreme Court rulings rejecting the liability of Barclays Bank for the wrongdoings of an independent contractor, on the one hand, and the liability of Morris’s Supermarket for the breach of data protection laws by one of its employees, on the other. Are enterprises to be shielded from the risks created by persons they commission to perform certain tasks?’

Full Story

Law Pod UK, 9th April 2020

Source: audioboom.com

New Judgment: WM Morrison Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 12 – UKSC Blog

‘This appeal concerns the circumstances in which an employer is vicariously liable for wrongs committed by its employees, and also whether vicarious liability may arise for breaches by an employee of duties imposed by the Data Protection Act 1998.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 1st April 2020

Source: ukscblog.com

Tribunal stays information rights cases for 28 days – Local Government Lawyer

‘The First-Tier Tribunal General Regulatory Chamber (Information Rights) has – with immediate effect – stayed for a period of 28 days all proceedings under section 48 of the Data Protection Act 1998, section 162 of the Data Protection Act 2018 and section 57 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 3rd April 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk