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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll