BrochuresCartoon

Amberhawk
COURSES (BCS/ISEB)
follow link for detail

Data Protection/GDPR Training

Edinburgh: Foundation
8, 9 & 10 October

Leeds: Practitioner
Starts 4 September

Edinburgh: Practitioner
Starts 11&12 October

London: Practitioner
Starts 6 November

FOI Training
London: Practitioner
Starts 2 October 2018

Training/Update/Events
Update: Nov 12
PIA: tbc
DP Audit: tbc

Amberhawk

« Should the European Data Protection Supervisor resign? | Main | Information Commissioner should enforce Article 8 privacy rights »

16/04/2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Well, it ignores the (rather important) other definitions of data in the precedings subsections. The email in question would - surely - have fallen under s(1)(1)(a) and/or (b).

The "accessible record" provision is arguably a red herring as well - as this only applies to health/education/ public authority records.

Has Eady J fallen into the trap of assuming all five sub-sections must appply for the definition to bite?

Is it failure to consider the other elements of the definition? An email is information which is being processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose.

The fact that it is an email automatically means that it was part of a relevant filing system i.e. the email system itself. As for being part of an accessible record, the email IS the accessible record.

The comments to this entry are closed.

All materials on this website are the copyright of Amberhawk Training Limited, except where otherwise stated. If you want to use the information on the blog, all we ask is that you do so in an attributable manner.