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

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