header-logo header-logo

​Privacy v security

03 February 2017 / Nicholas Griffin KC
Issue: 7732 / Categories: Features , Data protection
printer mail-detail
nlj_7732_griffin

Nicholas Griffin QC considers the CJEU Watson decision on UK surveillance law

 
  • A recent CJEU decision addresses an important aspect of UK surveillance law and finds it wanting.
  • It raises questions about the current UK regime governing the retention of and access to data about our communications.
  • The government says its approach is a necessary part of the fight against crime and terrorism. However, the view of privacy campaigners—that the law goes too far—found support at the CJEU.

The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) delivered a judgment just before Christmas that is full of significance for the government’s approach to surveillance and the fight against crime and terrorism. It did so in the Watson case (in fact joined cases Tele2 Sverige AB v Post-och telestyrelsen and Secretary of State for the Home Department v Tom Watson and others , C203/15 and C698/1 of 21 December 2016). The decision is a major victory for privacy campaigners such as MPs Tom Watson and David Davis, who were behind the case from its inception.

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll