header-logo header-logo

17 July 2015
Issue: 7662 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Data retention powers unlawful

MPs David Davis and Tom Watson have succeeded in their judicial review challenging the data retention powers in section 1 of DRIPA—the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014.

The legislation that was fast-tracked through Parliament to plug a gap left when the Data Retention Directive 2006/24/EC was annulled by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the Digital Rights Ireland case [2014] 2 All ER (Comm) 1. The CJEU found that it interfered with rights under Arts 7 and 8 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, corresponding to Art 8 ECHR. However, DRIPA broadly replicated the Data Retention Directive regime.

Nicholas Griffin QC, of 5 Paper Buildings, said: “It is not that surprising that it has been successfully challenged in the High Court under human rights and EU law on similar grounds as led the CJEU to strike down the Directive.

“The High Court held that the claimants were entitled to a declaration that s 1, DRIPA is inconsistent with EU law. The government has until March 2016 to replace the offending provisions. Interestingly, the Act contained a sunset clause, which meant the data retention provisions would have expired at the end of 2016 in any event.”

The government has been granted leave to appeal.

 

Issue: 7662 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
back-to-top-scroll