header-logo header-logo

AFR Technology: Automating bias?

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll