header-logo header-logo

Data retention powers unlawful

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

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll