Overstepping the mark on indefinite retention

29 April 2020 / Michael Zander KC

Issue: 7884 / Categories: Features , Human rights , Privacy

Michael Zander reports on a new (definitely unwanted) problem for the government

In brief

The Gaughran decision will require changes in the retention rules in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

On February 13, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) unanimously upheld Mr Fergus Gaughran’s claim that he had suffered an unlawful interference in his private and family life under Article 8 of the Convention by the indefinite retention of his DNA profile, fingerprints and photograph (Gaughran v United Kingdom (App No 45245/15), [2020] All ER (D) 78 (Feb)).

In 2008, twelve years ago, Mr Gaughran was arrested in Northern Ireland for the recordable (ie imprisonable) offence of driving with excess alcohol. He pleaded guilty, was fined £50 and disqualified from driving for 12 months. His DNA sample was destroyed in 2015 in line with the ECHR ruling in S and Marper v UK [2008] ECHR 1581, but the Northern Ireland Police Service (PSNI) did not agree

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

Overstepping the mark on indefinite retention

Michael Zander reports on a new (definitely unwanted) problem for the government

In brief

The Gaughran decision will require changes in the retention rules in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS

Read All

NLJ this week: Law Society calls for clarity on AML

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

NLJ this week: Turning corporate liability into opportunity

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

NLJ this week: A prince no more?

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

NLJ this week: Shareholder secrecy sunk

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'

NLJ this week: The expanding remit of national security law

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

Error message

Overstepping the mark on indefinite retention

In brief

In brief

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith