header-logo header-logo

Witness protection

05 July 2018 / Mark Solon
Issue: 7800 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession , Data protection
printer mail-detail
nlj_7800_solon

Mark Solon outlines why expert witnesses need to be GDPR compliant

  • All expert witnesses, as individuals or as part of an organisation, need to be GDPR compliant.
  • To ensure compliance, experts need to review their personal data processing activities in granular detail and identify risks.
  • If experts do not comply with GDPR they may find solicitors may not instruct them as compliance is mandatory, they may face sanctions including heavy fines and they may be sued as well as experiencing suffering reputational damage.

All solicitors must now be tired of hearing about the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) but I am sorry to say they need to know a little bit more. This relates to GDPR and expert witnesses.

On 25 May 2018, GPDR came into force. This new regulation is one of the biggest shakeups of personal data privacy rules since the birth of the internet. Under GDPR, individuals will have more control over their personal information and the level of privacy and security protections will increase. So, does GDPR affect

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
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
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
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
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'
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
back-to-top-scroll