header-logo header-logo

02 July 2009
Issue: 7376 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection
printer mail-detail

Public baffled by privacy notices

Code of practice highlights best (and worst) practices in data privacy

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has called for an overhaul of privacy notices that leave consumers baffled by unnecessary legalese.
Consumer research by the ICO shows that half of consumers don’t understand what they’re signing up to when they fill in online and paper forms. The ICO launched a privacy notices code of practice in June to help organisations provide more user-friendly privacy and marketing notices.
Privacy notices are the oral or written statements that individuals are given when information is collected about them, and explains who is collecting the information, what is going to be done with it, and who it will be shared with. The privacy notice can go beyond this, for example, by explaining access rights and rights of complaint.

Tom Morrison, associate, Rollits, says: “In an attempt to comply with the law some organisations have lost sight of the primary purpose of a privacy notice; to enable individuals to ascertain how their personal information will be handled, rather than to tick a box saying that a section of the Data Protection Act 1998 has been complied with. 

“The effectiveness of a privacy notice is generally inversely proportionate to its length and complexity. As notices get more detailed the ability to get through to the key points becomes increasingly difficult, and it has reached the stage where individuals can no longer see at a glance how their information will be handled.

“This has been identified as a particular issue over recent years, which led the Article 29 Working Party, a group which co-ordinates the approach taken by information commissioners throughout Europe, to propose a code of practice. It is out of this that the UK’s information commissioner pushed for a code highlighting what he considers to be best—and worst—practice. 

“The code is no substitute for taking sound legal advice and has no legal effect in itself, but it is certainly a positive development and a tool which should have an impact on the approach organisations take to designing comprehensive but easy to understand privacy notices.”

Chris Graham, the former director general of the Advertising Standards Authority, took over from outgoing information commissioner, Richard Thomas, in June.

Issue: 7376 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll