header-logo header-logo

Candid camera

07 June 2007
Issue: 7276 / Categories: Legal News , Human rights , Data protection
printer mail-detail

In brief

Up to 90% of Britain’s 14.2m closed-circuit television cameras may be illegal, according to CameraWatch, a national advisory body for the industry, which has the backing of the police and the Information Commissioner’s Office. Chairman Gordon Ferrie says his organisation’s research shows that the vast majority of CCTV is used incorrectly and could potentially be inadmissable in court. Most CCTV cameras in public areas, he says, breach the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998) and, in some cases, the Human Rights Act 1998. The most frequent breach is the failure to keep camera tapes secure as required by DPA 1998.

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll