header-logo header-logo

27 July 2012 / Tom Morrison
Issue: 7524 / Categories: Features , Data protection , Freedom of Information
printer mail-detail

Private eye

istock_000001153004medium_4

Tom Morrison returns with his quarterly review of the world of information law

Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust has been handed the largest civil monetary penalty issued so far under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998). At £325,000, this substantial fine was issued following the theft of computer hard drives containing confidential information relating to thousands of patients and staff in September 2010. Highly sensitive personal data was found on hard drives sold on eBay two months later. The data included details of patients’ medical conditions and treatment, disability living allowance forms and reports on children. It also included documents containing staff details such as National Insurance numbers, home addresses and information referring to criminal convictions and suspected offences.

Source of the information breach

It seems that the source of the breach was an individual engaged by the trust’s IT services provider which was supposed to securely destroy approximately 1,000 hard drives held in a secure room at Brighton General Hospital. Four of those hard drives made their way

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

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
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?
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
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
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll