header-logo header-logo

04 November 2016
Issue: 7721 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Human rights

Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and others [2016] UKIPTrib 15_110-CH, [2016] All ER (D) 147 (Oct)

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal held that it was lawful, as a matter of domestic law, for a secretary of state to issue directions to telecommunications and internet service providers to supply communications data to MI5 and to GCHQ, and for them to store and examine it. However, in the present case, the regimes for the acquisition, use and deletion by the respondent security services of bulk personal datasets and to allow directions to the public electronic communications networks to transfer bulk communications data to GCHQ and MI5 had not complied with Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights prior to avowals made in November and March 2015.

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

Charles Russell Speechlys—James Paterson

Charles Russell Speechlys—James Paterson

Charles Russell Speechlys further bolsters Private Equity expertise with the appointment of James Paterson

Ellisons—Samuel Flower

Ellisons—Samuel Flower

Ellisons strengthens Rural Affairs team with senior appointment

Sidley—Carl Hotton

Sidley—Carl Hotton

Sidley adds insurance mergers and acquisitions partner to London office

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll