header-logo header-logo

23 June 2021
Issue: 7938 / Categories: Legal News , Privacy , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Privacy risks of facial recognition

Facial recognition technology poses a risk to people’s privacy, Information Commissioner Elizabeth Denham has warned in a Commissioner’s Opinion

Denham said she was ‘deeply concerned about the potential for live facial recognition (LFR) technology to be used inappropriately, excessively or even recklessly’.

Her Opinion, which is based on six ICO investigations into LFR, sets out how data protection and privacy must be at the heart of decisions to deploy the technology.

She said: ‘It is telling that none of the organisations involved in our completed investigations were able to fully justify the processing and, of those systems that went live, none were fully compliant with the requirements of data protection law.’

She said organisations would need to justify the use of LFR was fair, necessary and proportionate in each specific context.

Issue: 7938 / Categories: Legal News , Privacy , Human rights
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
In this week’s NLJ, Fred Philpott, Gough Square Chambers, invites us to imagine there was no statutory limitation. What would that world be like?
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
back-to-top-scroll