header-logo header-logo

05 November 2009
Issue: 7392 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Custodial sentences for data protection breaches

Potential for up to two years in prison if government plans receive go ahead

Data protection breaches could lead to up to two years in prison, under plans mooted by the government.

Proposals to introduce custodial sentences are included in a Ministry of Justice consultation paper released last month, The knowing or reckless misuse of personal data. They would apply to individuals found guilty of knowingly or recklessly obtaining, disclosing, selling or procuring the disclosure of personal data without the consent of the data controller.

Offenders could be imprisoned for up to two years on indictment, and up to 12 months on summary conviction, in addition to unlimited fines on indictment or fines up to £5,000 on summary conviction.

There would be a defence available if the individual could show they acted for the purposes of journalism, or artistic or literary purposes, and with a reasonable belief that the obtaining, disclosing or procuring was in the public interest.

Tom Morrison, associate at Rollits, who specialises in data protection, says: “This has been a long time coming, but it does appear that the arrival of the new information commissioner has provided a renewed impetus to get custodial sentences on the books.

“Unlawful trading in personal information continues to make some people very rich. At the moment those individuals ‘only’ risk a criminal record and a fine. The theory is that if their liberty was also put at risk they might think twice before committing the offence.

“Bearing in mind that custodial sentences will be reserved for the worst offenders, a legitimate business which makes an accidental error in the handling of personal information has little to fear from the ministry’s latest proposals. Having said that it would be wrong to suggest that businesses can risk being complacent.

Morrison adds that in addition to the Ministry’s proposals and the Information Commissioner’s forthcoming new power to issues fines directly (in the form of monetary penalty notices), there remains a serious and genuine risk of reputational damage for any business which allows information about its employees or customers to be misused.

Former Advertising Standards Authority chief Christopher Graham took over the role of Information Commissioner in June.

 

Issue: 7392 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Commercial firm strengthens real estate disputes team with associate hire

Switalskis—three appointments

Switalskis—three appointments

Firm appoints three directors to board

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Six promoted to partner and one to legal director across UK and Ireland offices

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll