header-logo header-logo

18 August 2020 / Paul Schwartfeger
Categories: Features , Cyber
printer mail-detail

AFR Technology: Automating bias?

25974
Paul Schwartfeger highlights the potential for unlawful discrimination to be perpetrated by technology

In brief

  • R (Bridges) v CC South Wales: a warning to technology vendors of the potential risks of unlawful discrimination and bias that can be caused by technology.

In its recent judgment in R (Bridges) v CC South Wales [2020] EWCA Civ 1058, [2020] All ER (D) 26 (Aug) the Court of Appeal upheld three of five grounds of appeal against the South Wales Police (SWP) force’s use of automated facial recognition (AFR) technology. Among its conclusions, the court found that the force’s discretion for its use of AFR was too broad to meet the standard required by Art 8(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), albeit it found that the force’s use of AFR was proportionate in the circumstances. However, the court’s wider comments in its judgment serve as a reminder of the potential for unlawful discrimination to be perpetrated by technology.

Trials

South Wales Police force has conducted trials of mobile AFR technology

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll