header-logo header-logo

15 February 2009
Issue: 7260 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection
printer mail-detail

Trading in personal data could mean jail

Private detectives and journalists who misuse personal data could be jailed in future.

Last week, the Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) announced it would be amending s 60 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998) to raise the punishment to up to six months imprisonment on summary conviction, and up to two years imprisonment on conviction on indictment.

Currently, it is an offence punishable by a fine of up to £5,000 on summary conviction or unlimited on conviction on indictment, under s 55 of the Act for anyone “to sell or offer to sell personal data which has been (or is subsequently) obtained/ procured knowingly or recklessly without the consent of the data controller”.

The amendments follow concernsraised in the DCA consultation paper, Increasing Penalties for Deliberate and Wilful Misuse of Personal Data, launched last July, and in an earlier information Commissioner’s Office report that existing penalties were an insufficiently strong deterrent.

Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, says: “A custodial sentence will act as a deterrent for individuals who are tempted to obtain or disclose personal information unlawfully.”

Data protection specialist Peter Carey, editor of the Privacy and Data Protection Journal, says he expects custodial sentences will be reserved for repeat and serious offenders.

“I think the courts will welcome the extra power that they will have and will use it appropriately. I support the use of custodial sentences because some of the things done which give rise to the offence are very serious invasions of people’s privacy.

“Section 55 is very specific and narrowly drawn and should not inhibit normal investigative journalism although some tabloid journalists who take things too far will be at risk as will private detectives who operate in an unlawful way.”

A spokesperson from the human rights group Liberty says: “Data protection rights are very important and this increased penalty, provided it is not used unnecessarily, doesn’t alarm us unduly.”
 

Issue: 7260 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll