header-logo header-logo

22 September 2017
Issue: 6672 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Investigatory powers

Andrew v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [2017] UKIPTrib IPT_29_17_CH, [2017] All ER (D) 233 (Jul)

The obtaining of the complainants’ communications data by authorisations granted under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, s 22(3) had been unlawful. Accordingly, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal quashed the authorisations, and ordered the communications data obtained under them to be deleted, with an exception and the respondent Metropolitan Police Commissioner to pay the first complainant compensation of £5,000, as there was a sufficient causal connection between the infringement of her rights and the stress condition diagnosed.

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

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