2 until which at of 3 The scope of data protection Introduction Dictionaries and definitions seldom make compelling reading but in law, an under. Banding of basic concepts is key to an understanding of a topic. Prior to consideri Bere substantive aspects of data protection, this chapter will consider in some detail B= core concepts which define the scope of data protection legislation, A number of SFnitional terms are closely linked to form a knot which is almost Gordian in its Eemplexity. Any attempt to describe and analyse them is hindered by the fact that BPPreciation of the scope of one term presupposes to some extent understanding of Bibers. In the absence of a sufficiently sharp sword, the following precis may serve i introduction. The italicised terms will be subjected to more detailed comment lysis in the remainder of the chapter although the actual processing maybe carried out by a data processor operating under outsourcing or similar contract with the data controller Bee apparent simplicity of the terms is unfortunately misleading and there has been remains debate and uncertainty, both as to the scope of the concepts per se and jo the extent to which the United Kingdom’ legislation adequately implements the visions of the Directive. Decisions of the courts also have to be taken into account, Brith the leading authorities being the decision of the English Court of Appeal in Durant v Financial s Authority’ and the judgment of the European C Bistice in the case of B ist Rey definitions Personal data j Data Protection Directive defines personal data as including ‘any information Biating to an identified or identifiable natural person (data subject)? whilst the Dat109uo se papre au Aesaua8 51 won ruysp asfoaid vaaey OU 20p wi93 at Ufinounyy “eep 2qs2WH0Ig so asn pue uoNs9M}09 241 01 kepor pred st uonUBNE YDNVE ‘popra2as 24) Jo adoos aya unio tres Arexota suo, -sis esaures sejuis 20 1.99 ‘ureBy ep [euosiad se sse 1m spsom paproa9s 2904 redap aeridoudde atp 0) pay2oz4p 2q 0} [feo sol]e 01 spy0% 10 sxo s2ui05 Bupyeads £q aorasos auoydo}a poreurome we ypta 812823104 fenprarpU Ue yeKp 3U949 9) Uy “uoeStBay qn Jo arqure ayn TIPE axto> 04 Aj sf uoTIPUEIOYUT PapzoDaT Jo wroy Aue wsourpe yeip wesw AZoqoUYo>) ut syuoudo;aas ‘uonreuz0jU [enix2) 03 ysn>xo ysoupe Aide 09 papuor sae] uoHoaLoxd wep saBeIs 189 8} Ur you mopaq ¢ raxdeyey utp 2stp 2q [16s wopSury pana, axp tt wo outa} dus si pure aasy20arc sty Jo suorstsoud ayy (suoeatuNUA HOT stuOND9fE PUP Aovatig wo aaniramq) 10}205 suonea}unLIUsor 2140%}99/3 ay WT ADeAR aq) pur wrecr jeuosiag yo ss9901g ap Burusa910D, axyi2—x4q axp jo suorstAoad ayy sopun uonse10ud ausos asmnboe op suosiad [e89] 784) prow a. sop wop8ury poylup ayy, ‘suossad je89] 018 aye dele ste aye ue jo wor OYs I Ysnouspe Ou ay jo siuaua[9 Joquiayy (1 2tios“uyeSy ‘peop st9ys 49 yU>A9 9g Ut HoAD VorPTED 09 [e>Ipaut gp ynoge tonexajUt axtto> axojsaqy [Em UOrpUO UT Eye "wonspUOD ax Hay Sea [A LHIOGIATIE SIT npeu ut Areyptsoy 21 ioneoyydut aaey ose Kew wos sgoqiow aap Sut ydouraey se epns pasvaoap & 1 wossod jean, & 30 3429409 34 soseosip 191399 ‘s[enprarpur Stay 10 §4s92109 Blep pHs Ul SaouEReTUNAATD 99 Ae I sWopBury pou aya jo Axypyyea ayp Humndaa%e tang yep Jo hu TY} ©} Swe] feuONeU soya puerx9 0} UaSOY> “P9EpUT DAvY] SayeIs rOqUID} JO {ALOU Y ‘sqenprarpu! poseavap 01 Sunyjas ep oy ddde pjnoys worst Boy aq) 19 0 announsea Afpayssoaxe st wontUyap wopiury powun ap Z9EVH UO aTEqAP aLOs pu Suoyuyap oo auy uooMyag souaraytp [eotsjourusse) atU0s st az2qp “u9as aq ED sy wep [tuosiad Jo wontuyap arp Jo adors aya yun] 03 120}9 smorasuOD 8 UPU ZouIeE onaunstp Azoi2eystrestin we parapistod taaq Ajjexstiad pet Yetpn aAoUIaT O} UNSESLE ayn pu s1i102 03 Panow sem sexIsHBOy WOR IIL se woos 9q sdetjiod pinous gg6r IV worD210N4 FECT OM) UT LOISTAO.K ONDUHSIP ayp Um} ay 84 1994.9 949 012 eC oH) 24) Lang “uoruHdo Jo syuoua}eys 0} pueBox Ypioe ApryeA s9y~D18 you gt eNbo 1a sy sty >ofgns aqp or wey zayperJOpIOY yep ay 0} [euosted 19% wonuayUt Jo siuauIayeIs IeIp Sea kbp a4 Jo WOUTUZDAGB yy is pue— gus somidde rutod ay 3nq. ue Aq premio} ind quoumSze oy], JOU 210M Yorys—uoHTUAIUT Jo stLDU euosiad se passep areas ypqy—woruydo jo sjuouiayeys ua9ajoq uoRUEsIp pas!oAL> T wopSury p 2 PapMPUT YI RBI HPV WoReIOG BIE iQ [eUTBIA0 24 WOH sea] areunazoyuin sdeqrad e quasosdax sit], fenptagpuy ax Jo 1Dadsar uy tos satjo Aue 10 sa]fon uoD wep 24) Jo SuONUANUY ax Jo WoREDIpUL Aue pue [eNpLAIpUT oT an0q 1d uoruyap 247 uo worurdo jo uorssardxe Aue 03, spuarxo uiim aqp veKp 8 spuedys roy au, ;:fenprarpur Surat © 0} aqepar YHA eIep, oF s19J91 I> UORDIIOIG NOMLaLOWd VLVG ANY XOVAIta | OFTHE SCOPE OF DATA PROTECTION | szories of data.’The first relates to the physiological characteristic relating to a seveal identity, This category would include items such as finger prints and, ps ov fating to more advanced forms of technology, face andr recognition. A second se yof biometric data reales to what re referred toas behavioural characteristics, Be me suggests this concerns the manner in which a person acts. A simple and Hee. established example would relate to the manner in which a person signs his o" Het fe. More technologically advanced versions relate to the u ‘0 monito ener in which a particular individual uses a computer Keyboard in terms ofthe accuracy, and force with which keys are depressed. Gasmnctric date, which forms a cornerstone of modern passports and the proposals Pe national identity card scheme, is clearly an aspect of personal data. Data may etive or subjective and, indeed, true or false. In an Opinion on the concept of Booval data. the Article 29 Working Party, which was established as an advisory Egy under the Data Protection Directive and is composed of national data protection Bethoritics,* suggested that: As ares nducted on a gielin the context af a court proceeding about he “deavring made by her representing her family i sub aici. The drawing provides information about the git's mood and what she aie erent members of her family. As such, st could be considered as being per eat ata The drawing will indeed eveal information relating tothe child (her state e heclth from a psychiatric point of view) and also about eg. her fathers or mothers Hravigus, Aza revul, the parents in that case may be able to exert their right oface=ss Ssadicated in the above example, personal data may relate to more than one Person. ie which will be considered in more detail below Sensitive data BF fori of information, however insignificant, may be classed as personal dats. The Beir to which cereain forms of data can be classed as especially sensitive and desers Be of special protection has long been a contentious sue. During the passage of the Protection Act 1984, the atempt to identify sensitive data was compared, some Beet scornflly, by government ministers with the quest for the unicorn. Both wits Geidered mythical creatures In the case of personal data, the context in which dav eid or used was considered far more Important than the data itselE A Ist of Fees and addresses, for example, would not normally be considered sensitive, Dit Hraicw might change fit referred to the movements of prominent persons and eee nde ofa terrorist organisation. Whilst this view is not without merit it does Bek to transform the exceptional into the norm. Almost invariably, data pretest” Fe rave recognised that there are certain categories of information which would Heli be regarded as possessing a degree of sensitivity and in respect of which ial rom pcufusice_bomelsprivacy/a s/2007!wpl36_en.paoneuiz0ju12¥p Jo you yeep sreadde a ‘sayqqoy pu yo s1oMp Jo a1NVeULIIp Jos|reIeP Jota Buypnput san Sear ystaed s0y jo usaqy 309 pure wstabpurTssW noqe woRRPwIOFU pourejuos ysrysaBed asa Jo Joquim jo uorrezedaad pure y>sMf> Wesa INT HSEP2AS ptt UL astyD9IOD w se>fr0M J94 Jo Yadsou UT sKe| UOrIIaIORd EIEP YSIPEMS aMp Jo SOyDE>IG Jo parotauo> uaeq poy stabpuy Sup ‘sun09 ysiposss 24) 4q pasod suonsanb jo zaqum op astodsas ut Sura Aseuranpaad v aid on payse sem 2onsny yo ynoD weadomg DIA a Istbpury npog uy stzno> ayy 4q paresdiowy Ajpeoag ua9q sey sotoBare> 2e[n21 “red yo ad038 24) uoryetusojut yo sarroBaye> 0 aGurs aptas ¥ ButIOA09 04 UONEPPE Ut] "eyep aarystas Jo 51] s0anyeys aq UH papHnpauy you sexes asuodsar 1s9y3U yp powenye yoga ‘evep [epsueuy ‘Afunsaxarey “Te 2|geI, UL amo Yas are syNsar ap sanistr3s Sataq se tonjeuszosut jo sodAs ay}oads papreay siuapuodsox y>ryos 0 UD} aun Uo sitora 348008 , 9007 Ut ZaUOHSsTEWIOD WoRBULIOFUT 24) 40} poroMpUOD YXEASayL Tuonup, ueadosng at Jo sowyg Joquiayy ayp s80s3e samsst SPrEAOT S9PRIRTE ISI9SIP s999)91 Sypayqnopun pue ay bR6T auL HEYA zOpIM Ayqesapisuo> st LORNYe STL, artoaaic ath jo yeu suossTes AZoqoUrTI SJoy aup ‘sFoqeq earudosOTA, s2ArP=stC 1g) 0} ayeU TET. @ Jo sfat}2q 394, wHID) ax SuTIMyNsqns Jo oRdIDx9 om AEM ons uy mo aya go 2ouqu9s 2xp 40 ‘sBuypaesoud yons jo fesodsrp aq “uy q ponturtio9 uaaq aaey] 0} padarTe 10 payrutUso souayo Aue 10} SBuypaer0xd Are (W) souayo Luv Jo unr dq WorssteUntUOD paBa||e 0 worssHWuOD ayp (8) aye Tenxas sty) worpuos 10 yyjeay persue 20 peaisdyd sty (2) saorumn apes Jo squat vs! 24 1241246 (P) s:myeu zepuys e jo sfarjaq z9tpo 40 sgotfaq snoxBs|21 814, (6) suorurdo feorqod sty (Q) qns evep ax Jo uyBz0 UY 940 yeIDes aM 101 Juyyojou exep Aue Sunsseduuooua sv pouyep sou s! eep 2ArHstI9S step Jo stun0} Joyo yan aseo ay} st WeKA squouIBsIMbox aatsuorx9 az0UU 01 HUISSI20 sarsiae(qns pur vone|si2aj xp Jo 1zeay agp omy vrep axrsuss jo quouneas aq sBuG ge61 1>¥ WoRDeIOLA EEC 3Y] “Pasto1oxa 1aaau sea raMod SIU], /SUONAOD [PUTLIED to sayy [enx98 yyy fewdout 10 [eaIshya ‘y91Poq JoWpo 30 snoFHyor‘suorusdo jeantTod suyt10 pervero1 Suze] EWP Jo 3>0ds—1 Ut sapdsutsd won>eo% snBuauis 01 peu 9q 1yBiwu suoneyn Baa yemp popraoud yg6r 12V Wor>>y01d PECL AM} “PARE parronuoo pue paywiy 2q pros. roneuwiossip wey. pamsse aq 02 Ysa ZHU SHafqas eyeP Jo siaquimer yeRUEEISGNS NOMLOaLOMd VLV GNV XOVANIAbemade plorigin, al life, or Act 1998 Table 3.1 Attitudes towards sensitivity of types of data ercentage Financial data Personal contact details Sexval ie information Biometric information Criminal ecords Political opinions Education qualification Data concerning race or ethnic origin [Employment history ‘Membership of political party/or Religious or philosophical belies wai 4 in what was intended to be a light-hearted manner. One particular item of information which was the cause of specific investigation was the indication that a named person had injured her foot and as a consequence was able to work only on a part-time basis. Data concerning the subject's health life? Mrs Lindqvist was pros ecuited by the Swedish authorities on a number of charges, including one of processing sensitive personal deta without having secured authorisation from the data protec- tion authorities. The European Court of Justice was asked to rule on the question of whether the reference to the foot injury of Mrs Lindqvist’ colleague constituted sensi tive data relating to health. The court’ reply was succinct and emphatic Inthe light ofthe purpose of the Directive, the expression data concerning health used in Articie8(1) thereof must be given a wide interpretation so as to include information concerning all aspects, both physical and mental, of the health of an individual in some respects, the decision in Bodil Lindgyist illustrates the difficulties surround ing the concept of sensitive data, Once included in a list of sensitive data, itis almost ossible to say that a reference to illness or injury is not included, but as indicated above context is perhaps more important than content. A reference to the fact that an athlete was unable to compete in a race because of a broken leg, for example, does not seem to be possessed of a sufficient degree of sensitivity to justify the imposition ofquo puonas v ut pauteu aq ryt 9g we 398 30 mata Sauna woreNA Bore yo 1ySts apetzorne we an 04 “play seat You sem wonepstso|a1pJ0 asodnd HL, oo 217 03 30U pasaprston sea Sup 1UDAD OM) WE SoIpoUTAs ayge|FEAe AE ast>1999 0 situ Jay 20 sty aBu}47U you pap Buyssazoxd recy AyaaA 01 120/qns Hep Be oqqeu 01 pores sean sea. ost 243 U suo 40x ss9020 afgns mp jo sod Bed ou, 1eaddy jo.un0 aup Aq paidope sem uorreardzoyur aanoenser ax0UE Ste enpssspu ue yt Bon soutu09 190u1p ss3] 10 sou v axon sty uE Bursa, “7alqns w yaEN 158909 10 F spuoza}o1 24 plnoys azays tf) UOTOW 2ALss4s91 FOUL ¥ PUP OY P2}2DUTTO? 24 HEN Hon}20uuo> auios, SutABy o} a>ueray=z peosg e 109 org Camsog oer ys puofo s2ys0$ 249 01290: Grou: © pozesoape iepuodsas arp 203 faswnoc 1x9) axp utyptsn zwadde pynoss aWwye Sy ey 197 wy anata Aq eyep feuosiad se passe 9q pinom querjadde 24 bina ured ® oy asuodsox Ur wary to9q pey YPIY TONge ays Surqusap MALL Hoc e aydurexa 5 nu, “2uteU s JENpEAIPUT Ue O} 2DuaIa>1 Aq apees asEqEIEP v Kiovese e Suimoyjoy payezaua aq aya yore evep Kur sseduroou2 0} Aqpeorq peiaid pn 2g prnows 0) are, ws9) a erp pan Bze WEIN 0} SUNOS "WH OF PTEs ypousa sem onssy feoru9 aya uUyTadde 2 » Supaoyfo} paresoua8 pen] wonsan ty eyep 24 Jo TE OUST nop ou sean az9q2 YBHOWTY py wonsaI04d PIECE cy pazosoo you sex wans4s ap sean —stais Buy enue wt pauTenTets 2194 gpuna yo Jaquunu ej 2809 91 UY ope PassnosIP 29 Ts Se— xo wea oth 05 ops viep [euosrad axmynst pip wtpioys peurejuo> worenaey] 2p EA Sn Peru sano payin asa spzoo0 s0uR0, "sme pays opty PvPPHo02 sPlorym woryewsoyu! jo donDepar 10 woueaouo> aq) YBN WHOS [ey dw Kuo 2 gum zonal Jno 01550098 parts se woRbuszoput aos NOTY BSE) eerarn ontong e10cl auf Jo suoisynoud se J20(qns ax Jo n}qure atl Japun SPs MY gues 60 ssan08 10 yuopedde ayy wos} asonbat w wos) sore ase Mowe Fys Auowpny sooqaing ewe mp KPoq Asovenfes Aasnpal At OS xyopdiuo> swat oo Sunuao> e pe eg mt uomeB ysso2ansum wy pansy Ped sl ANE serene aundsip poraesioud uy panos wang pel wejadde 2) JANA + er eeono woryeurzopay 5xH0PBury Pau 7 Aq paonposd 2OuEPIND sce Agana Suptiow 67 2PEY ath 30 woRUIdE we Ur parapysuo> wo9g se KIS aaa an fenprarpur we oy sea evep USHA uonTOyED Ae apiagnd SY A) aeons a upton -sroquiout Aare 2410 0} pue pte ayp 01 870182p Sayles amos eiep a ‘240ge pays SursMesp S,PIND 2p Jo aydtsex9 2 UL eyo aout 99 eu worvenis ty S969 29101 Pot322002[enPIATDEL ATS eee soay ann image woReULZosUT 9G) WH HOP ou Fes TYP SLADPHT LPC jpalqns eep au 01 Gune|ay gua viva any xovania | FYBy and in fourse of By (FSA) ange of jon Act, provided hich it ice to ecto THE SCOPE OF DATA PROTECTION | 45 Some interest in the matters covered. In particular, it was stated, subject acce ot intende: 0 assis F example, to obtain discovery of documents that may assist him in tigation or complaints against third partes. Giving effect to this principle was that the mere fact that a search of a comput Eeatents by reference to a data subject's name revealed a number of documents did mean that these documents necessarily constituted personal data relating to the bject. A more sophisticated analysis was required tscems to me that there are two notions that may be of assistance. The frst s whether information i biog Lia significant sense, that is, eyond the record ing ofthe putative data subject's involvement in a matter or an event that has no pe Sonal connotations, a life event in respect of which his privacy could not be seid to compromised. The second is one of focus, The information should have the puta s rather than some other person with whom he may have been involved or some transaction or event in which he may have figured or have hed an interest for example, as in this case, an investigation into some other person's or body's conduct that he may have instigated. In short, itis information that allects his privacy, whether in his personal or family life, business or professional capacity This approach adopts, it is suggested, an overly restrictive view of the rationale of ta protection laws. Whilst determining the legality of data processing and correct $a errors certainly constitute important elements, equally important isthe ability to Become awareof what datais held. Much of the Data Protection Directive" and the Data Protection Act 1998's requirements relating to the factors legitimising data processing the importance ofthe data subject being aware of what is happening with regard rsonal data. As was stated by the German Constitutional Court in the 1980s; ‘he possibilities of inspection and of gaining influence have increased to a degree hitherto unknown and may influence the individual’ behaviour by the psychological Presoure exerted by public interest...if someone cannot predict with sufficient cer inty which information about himself in certain areas is known to his social milieu, and cannot estimate sufficiently the knowledge of parties to whom communication ay possibly be made, he is crucially inhibited in his freedom to plan or 10 decide ely and without being subject to any pressure/influene These factors support the adoption of an expansive definition of the scope of per Renal data. Ina case such it may well be that personal data in the form o Ge individual's name or other identifying data makes peripheral appearance in a Becord. Rather than arguing that the appearance of the data does not come within of the Act, it might be preferable to focus upon the extent of the informa Sen which might be supplied. Whilst the court was clearly concerned that the datae. «ne eo oe o 7 oT ee eas Aaquuapy e208. yeamqn9 ‘oxta0U0>9 eH sud syq 0} ay pods S10}>44 210u1 30 940 03 J0 2aquiner won>yHUapI Le jn2qzed ut sipoouypus x0 9001p oys. auo st uosiad ajgeynuapy ue nc S9ptAox p20ITCT UORDeIO44 UIE YI. "sjoru02 aaneyst8aq Jo wo! eoyda aqp 203 wone2ynisnf ou pue Aoearad oy ea ye>yqUs ou 3q te> a15Hp ‘pase Jo ‘passa2oud ‘paypa|jo9 sf e}ep Y>tien tH JOULE aM WtO3s PayTIUEp! aq 20UNED [EAL pur ue J[-swopaayy pur sqysuxs>0/qns a 9 01 Weautp SoaMyTSuOD sfenpyagpttO} Sut “11 Prep Jo Butssa>0s¢ ayp 1eys St wone|s189] uorrDa}oxd wep SutApapum asituard sup Jone>4AUBp! jo sens] nprarpur yey) uodn avec we sey worgeuzsopuT Tey Jo Bu oad at 31244410 enpraspur aq moqe BuIyRawios puoads s0 W722] 01 passaroud 5111 2940 Bp euossod 9 Ae “y Yuu payeosse aureU B MOU U9Ad ‘empragpur Le soyUDpT ypraa eve, oy) SunsoB8ns ‘ouoq 19 rej UIs Sasso Jouorss}UIHIOD HORE; squopSury pawn, aq) 4q paonposd soueping sy uuodn j2rdu sour e ua) ySnowy 2u9}Ut pur sisi §fonpIAIpu! ue 4 03 AT St 2] ‘rep Jo ast aq) ways sayidde quoufa ynsou v “{ffeuTy “soPHod aBesn dnd veqp 10 AyeunS30 aKojdura ysuree won reuyd nd ou, ssaynduion aoejdhjsom u0gy passaaae sausqam ayp Jo zasoydura ue 4q popsosas 29 ‘94d vurexa 105 dew Beq ‘poyK9H 8 [enpLAIpUE te YT UE Zoe jy auTuLIaRep 01 posn, oq 02 popuatur st erep ayp uyM saxidde yuoua|2 asodund oy, «AzoBare> step uTyEAL oyu Ways paystyes 2q [ [Las JUPUID[a JUEMTOD ay, “TENPrAIPUL sepHOn zed B or saIty—r rep seq Surpuy e Aynsnf 01 sepso ut wuasoid 2« Ayreg Burp 94, “siuouua|s ynsoe pur '95 spsau juaurapp avo {quo yeip S803 ng wojsea20 wo xajduso9 29 4 19 9x) WaoMIeq WORDNET nd aH 0} pazsngau are aseUy,[eNpLAPUL Aw N>4 ed v0} sa} BBP YoU) aWopUl LUE Y>ryps suDULo}> a93¥p say NEDPE UOEEG oq, suomi 103 sunaye 1 AFojouypay diyp (IY 0 voRE|AL Uy yom smoyAsud sy BUI329 pul Ue 0} saves NEP HIYA, 2ouEpINg aarsuarxe septaoad uorUEdG s,C4zeq SuryI0.M snozaasd pamoijoy pey suuadxo pur siuoppeid asour eexp ene audsoqur semouteu soured v paydope axvy 0} pooysiepun AjepiM ay au sea jeaddly jo tunog aqp, reyp parow Apiuaaox seq] 1auOSsTEAMIOD OTEAEIORUT at] np [eo i pre od sv passepp 9q pnos Y>IYM UORPULOFU 3y joam 1 9tp wo ssans 199 01 2ggesaozd uaag anetayBIe “uvq> [289] Jaypo ySnosyp pauterqo.2q you pjno> yeya wep pure satu nD9p Jo KzaA0D8"p uureago 0} drone oup ur NOLLOMLOWd VLVG ANY AOVARIE | 9Pto obtain fed nature of Appeal was The Article 5 afirms lates to a par Bements. The ng Party even though ct upon sd Kingdom’s it, may be dividual, data relat fan indi B processed, or or the applica HE SCOPE OF DATA PROTECTION | Also relevant are the provisions of Recital 26 to the Directive. This states that Whereas the principles of protection must apply to any information concerning an identified or identifiable person; whereas, to determine whether a person is identifi able, account should be taken ofall the means likely reasonably tobe used either by th controler yy other person to identily the said person. hue United Kingdom's Data Protection Act 1998 provides that personal data: means data which relates toa living individual who can be identified (a) from those data: or (6) from those data and other information which is inthe possession of, oF is likel to come into the possession of, the data controller It will be recognised that the Directive and the Act differ in that the Act restricts ts application to information which is or is likely to come into the possession of the data controller. The Directive's application is open-ended, applying whenever anyone ‘might be able to identify an individual. A recent example might illustrate a difference Between the two approaches. In 2006, AOL placed on the Internet data relating to search requests made by millions of its subscribers. Although no names were p ished, in at least some cases it proved possible to identify individuals following analy- arch history. One case concerned a user allocated the identifying number £417749. This user had conducted searches on a range of topics, including medical conditions relating to humans and animals, landscape gardening, persons with a ps ficular surname (Arnold), and house sales in a particular area of the United State Taking this data, researchers focused on a particular individual, Thelma Arnold, who, sehen read ina list of the searches, confirmed that they had been made by her: Under the United Kingdom approach, itis likely that the data would not have been considered personal data at the point it was compiled by AOL because that organisé fon would not have possessed the necessary additional information to identify users. Under the Directive's criteria, the material would probably have been classed as personal data, as AOL would have been required to consider the possibilty that third parties could perform the task of identification. Its likely that fits disclosure and decoding were tobe {carried out in the United Kingdom (or any other state of the European Economic Area IEEA)) the person identifying individuals would be classed asa data controller in his o her own right and subject to the same obligations to comply with data protection law Matters would be much less satisfactory were the decoder to be located outs EEA and, of course, dissemination of information via the Internet is global in its natu fhe AOL example undoubtedly represents an extreme case but the issue of identifi ability may frequently be an issue. Once again, the Article 29 Opinion on the concepta Soeun Suk ee ta t).l!™COC SA?) ‘asodind juryezodo yrotrdinbo yo suvau Aq passa>aid Buraq st (P) 2.40) uaayl suonansAsUT OF ssuodsas ut Aq|e20 eyep prom 243 Jo MOREY # st SIIB 0} part 1 furypoqg ‘oneutg soyjo 20 uorreuuosstp ‘worssyaisuesy Aq wep 40 woREIAoyu axA o 210s sep 40 uorpeui0suy aipJo-9sn 0 WoRysUOD [EADIE pp 10 uorrewzoju ay Jo vorre9 neidepe ‘woryestu080_ (0) tuo suontiado yo 39810 worressdo {ue 1 10 Surpiose1 Huyuyego suwacs yep 30 WORPUZO;UE 0) uoHEjar uy “FuIss22030 ae sept i soup uoRTUyop S39V 24 ord 1] Suyseonoad yenureur x0 p: asufiqe oyqeqeae Surfer ayaiatpo 20 woH, wo ainsexe uyy20}q WoREUTGOD 101 cunuassip tossjussures) dg amsopsip ‘9s ‘aorey|AswoD “[eAsEN>Y UoNyeA=y|E 30 Uo idope 9Sei03s “uoneziueB1o Buypsoses ‘uon>aT}oo se yon ‘suvouH 2}etHOINe 4 10 reuosiod uodn pouiosrad sf yoru suortesado Jo 32s 10 woneedo, sopnpour Buyssa2oud yeqp azoxy sop|soud asn3>001¢] UL “BurssaD0%d nou S117 Sunaysuod se passep> aq tno Kajayi90 Jo suuaoy req sapystto9 01 aveyIdoud ppassaooud st Yep 3eq uOMOM a¢f1 UO pate sypau Bulssa2qid yo ydaau0> ay. suoxyejia ay hq pasanod 2q fs Sursea2ard ye 's9se9 21108 w >yqissod st wor waypuapy se Bu0] 0s 1eI) aydurexa an sod dase Supqi0y4 amp ayqyssod aq sXeanpe you dows uoRPEgUApy sain roo aqp puryeqstenpLaIpULa aa ureyuren ke siadogdiua sjqyssod pur (S461) Stapraord 2908125 3 Aqgpear st [enpLArpu ay. nq wantS st aureU ON HOB Jo wes e BusCase9 pur HH 1 wou pure ssaynduroo sepnanized yp pare1sosse asm jause}U] Jo Spx youanay “apesy “91qry aang sdooy] 12 Jo Aeauzoop axp uy paduumys Suns 30 reqooy siaiiuey, jonsuy soyerado A190 & 30 parisod 99 3 2q deur fenpratput ue s9Fe> 40430 uy woreagTapY pre ke soquIMU VORIPyTUP! Ue dap iapyyns 9q rou Aeur srg preuocT>y_ 40 YES Se Y>ns aUIEL YOLTIHOD 502389 2 Jo W103 sno}ago UPstoumEUrY oy BrEp AULT Fue pyewosrod js) ® Bujreas uosiad ayy weap 04 12040 29104 soAosJopuN we au ojduwexa agg, Sp2ampur ajqeyauepr ut Ajjepadso yanoypye woneaynu: pin ansuarxasaptaoad puesuonenss fenuaiod oa Noroa10wd Viva aNY xovaria | ghive guid especially in Sufficient. Use idual may be Hoops Str FAeain, Internet jf Internet use ind thecom: the example s processed. peed to make essing. It pro. in response THE scoP' ATA PROTECTION (©) is recorded with the intention that it should be processed by means of such (©) is recorded as part of. relevant filing system or with the intention that it should form part ofa relevant filing system”? ibe term ‘relevant filing system is designed to extend the legislation to certain forms Sfmanual filing systems and will be consid ely below. It will be noted that of the definition is extremely broad. It mig gested, with little element Sfexaggeration, that whilst the act of dreaming about data will not constitute process BE, any further activities will bring a party within the scope ofthe legislation, Although not yet at issue before a United Kingdom court, the question of what Eonstitute processing was raised before the European Court in Bodil Lin An Baitial issue concerned the question of whether the mention ofa person on ge Eopstituted processing of personal data as defined in the Data Protection Directive 2! Bro issucs arose in this context: first, whether the data on Mrs Lingvist’s web page eluded personal data. The court's reply was unequivoc The term undoubtedly covers the name ofa person in conjunction with his telephone {Soordinates or information about his working conditions or hobbies Equally clear and unsurprising was the court's determination that processing hed #eken place. The Swedish government argued for abroad approach, suggesting that ‘as Boon 2s personal data are processed by computer, whether using a word-processing Programme or in order to put them on an Internet page, they have been the subject BE processing’. Although Counsel for Mrs Lindqvist argued that something more was Beeded beyond compilation of what was effectively a word-processed document and Bbat only metatags and other technical means used to assist with the compilation of dexes and retrieval of information would suffice, the court agreed with the Swedish According tothe definition in Article 2(t) of Directive 95/46, the term processing of such n Article 31) covers any operation or et of operations which is per Although all forms of processing are potentially covered by the Data Protection Directive,” the most stringent controls apply in the case of processing by automatic means, It is arguable that any use ofa computer to create a document comes within the Beope ofthis criterion, as there is no direct physical link between the author pressi Sey and a letter or symbol appearing on the screen. The act of loading a page ontoSciam geet iV wonsaiorg e1ecr aun ‘2noge payestpuT sy woRes!s2] Bunuouiaes Bao ado-s ax wayyse yn039 9q prHous sprooo enUeU yoKM OL uaN=9 a NEL Br ox sane J9quay¢ A 30} adore ofgesopsoD saaea| ATP vsinord st aqnaaaicy au jo 2dors aur ey segue stunan ou z9pan ys HaI> agads on BuTpso028 PSININN NS you are yoryen ‘seed s9409 947 SP if S138 10 yy Seazayp ‘97S JOQUOA Fes funn ye 29 AB a8 Dns o 9900 BuyusaAe RIN? WARBTP PUP SIP 2 yo es pamnyonays 8 Jo SHiaME}SUOD ay HUyULULAD2P 30} EHP OzAHTP spay Or voRuNp acy sin su at ‘Seas ep worsod ato 52728 § mre syenpraqpu oy Buejas eueyz> ay}oods or Hup20220 ded eyo suanuo9 ogy xenon ed useage sayy poymanssuy uy Haan arson ep ussan0xd fentTeu spre891S0 'ss2]yaUoT SeaaHA STONED au o gous suoqian ¥ayeoi9 pinor sip astasamio“Posn sombyuaa 3x8 Uo PuadEp srage uryon yenen won>enord si 0 24098 ayy seasoyr SBuesoo:d [enue oy 98 EP Pe ssaoid aamonne ot Yona se Syd SoU serplarputjo woReeO1d 241 SEIN, Aaoys axp senuygua> £2 TEP: aoxysan uy exep jpuosiod a4p 0} S822 ovo yuutod 0 560s sjenpiaypus 03 Bure eay39 ayroads on Burpronoe Po4nnss tae egy eur paatenuo> 99 0h papuav 21810 pae}uo> are pows2202d BPP 2D eae gt quo aan se) A possaaos7 sep sans > Bupsoord a SEs reap surepdx 24220 Boxaoonosa eve] 24) Jo St TPH “POpMPU! aq 01 st wsteds jensen {3242 100 "NOHETS ey day pafsaaa st ois payeuronne Axaaa sosn » Aq pauyutiaep Wrote Bproose ut erop yo suonzefo sea 30 so4sres 5g wood ue suns’ EE T pauuep aaisds Buny wep Touosied, fue op puowxs 09 s ado>s si TH £90 soad aoe ec au, Suston0 poet Jo we] 208 3020108 2M Bae irep oi pon Agave sea sabe aot BY wonzeo!g WECM APEN swiayshs Bully payewoyne-LON yorum Jo 30a] 18 autos ‘suonesado Jo soquml E PAsfOAUT IMDS dM omoa1owa viva aNy xovarsa | 0SHE SCOPE OF DATA PROTECTION | ¢ con a exant fling system’ asthe vehicle for this endeavour. Th Statutory Oa or that complex, in large part because the legislation etn coex- Bah cuca ait statutes which had provided for aright of access woe in Betical, ccucational, social work, and eredit Beever, it provides tha Beene a Tatsm’ means any oot of information relating to indivdeale to stng stance nrmaton isnot proceed by means of canes here onal Ho fesponse to instructions given for that puree Mavals pte BY teference to individuals or by reference io caper orms of manual records has been the cause of considerable ng the potential costs of organisations of complying with Bore og wiSct sc2*ss It should be noted, however, that the Come ner Credit eit aan (ie Access to Health Records Act 1990 have long provid Bie 28 medical records, irrespective ofthe format in wee ee are stored, Be <1 the Freedom of tnformation Act 2000 has provine very extensive Bo crrscsr Public sector information and as the Information Caran er Bes commented: EesPericnce elsewhere indicates that in practice in many information pr sp reedom of ation requests will relate to the individual yen Bo crocs eta mana records willbe covered, the question of when infor ries osidered ‘readily accessible’ isofcritical importance Bs cxtent ofthe provision in Parliament, twas suggened tray would not Bee <1 {et information about an individual should be located na single place ee Manila folder containing all ofan employee's work recat order thc rune Pe covered, it would additionally be requited thatthe inne nation Bg {ide should be held in a structured format so that indice items mi Beedily be extracted ing during the Bills Report stage in the House of Lon Williams stated that Br intentions are clear, We do not wish the definitio ms of Paper about individuals, even ifthe collections are cern Mead a ame or other unique identifier onthe front, ifspecificdacs ae Mvidual cannot be readily extracted from that col bane file with my name on the front Let us assume thatthe oe of paper or other document about me I section has collect urse of my career and those paper he fle in date order w ans of readily identifying specific information about meSayrqysuodsar ayy, 89908 y20lqns 305 asanbax 8 01 priodsos 07 urye9s UE Es 27H} 2 Fi sojjorsuo> exep v yorya. yser 947 Jo apne ayy oF wansS sem WoR2PIstOC ep [ouosiod poynarystoa yrawmnsop sayre\N UTWHIO}9p 0} a0 xa[dwo> axou wan Saaninsop Agnwapr 0} 54se3 afduars Ayaaryejas v aq pjnom at ‘2A0qe paquDsap 11994 Pel Sy -siuauimoop jo yey weys ToYpes Taa(qns Sep 2x7 Jo AoeaIad aq) y2aoxd 01 Hae Moqwoter 4>y 2t}) 0} 9peU sem souazajas “UTEBY “a[y WeAsfeA v aMyASUOD OF Pax? Epson aq pytios wonsanb ui sprosex at Y>idss 03 uarx2 xp parapysu0> 409 Hp feuosiod se poprefas oq yi ewep saqrey jo anss}axp Jo yuN02>0 Supye) ULERY pocniy angetpreg 2e>podaniey epueouc RE 70 pure siuausSpni yo sidiosees,‘yUDUNS0p Jo Yor eakutEx> o|su2H03 Jo soda Bocrepzasye auoydoj1 yo satdoa Suypnypur ‘swuotm20p jo 2Buex ® pauteyUO> Oste SaTEy By 217 wrIpIM szapiatp ayroads 0} aouarajax Aq, any SuySgURpr sop 20S ta “Po ea uoreoyT Uap! jo paay pu saxBap ayy. yweyjadde a qpiyes wonreeaOp Baos paurero> soqy asacp Jo re HN Vsa au ratpo Aq 30 Rremcr ayy 4q 194 yn—opeut 29g peysturey dso. yoru wureBe reg a jo weyp sey By 2th wo aweu an sooueysut sayyo Uy Inq sures, yTeINC PEYPHHY AH sepUN J9PIO}e UL Hoyenoy alan syuotunaop ‘sase> attos UW “Lonesyue8L0 pure ammyarzs Jo sfasay SUED Beye nstousap pu suii0y 0 Aiaizea Poo asamp ‘wuauipn( axa UE paqua>sap sy "spu07=2 Renureur jo a8uea v 07 sa30e soy unP sjueifadde 24) 01 woresapisuoD aaTsuapND ACE Ginon aya ‘oanyeu sy ut feuosiad se passe steep J04f94s4 Jo 2aoge possmosep ansst ae Reonippe 1 yeXaaoyiny sooaog porounng a sreun uy worstpap feaddy JO 1zn0°) 2 Br punoy 09 we> pastes sanss} amp 01 (suonsanb Kou se seo] In) sTOMsUE FOS fey oF sepnonaed, st uoneuojuy aqr ‘ssafoytienaN aedode 88 Dy yomayas coneulaoyet yo aBures apts 8s 2x7 2sNe2—q api 2g ew apy [auUOSIEd uy uorremaorujo aB ex ayy, SuuTaHoaUn uoNsUNsEp qn puy ayy "wPyo yeu ed Poueusoysod ‘sous sous se sumer yons Buys22009 uo eUEOGUI JO aE piu a70yp se voneuosu rejn>nzed, 9q20U [He 3p ouuosod jounu Yay Heuraojul 304) pone us9q sey “sanamoy] “uonteaydde ey 03 yoUTIad Af2—Itp aq pious 20 jo apy axa woreusosur qn [ese pasado aq SyqunSze prom word onesdyarary we on Surefar ayy # ul pay wor eutzoguy ssAfeu sr UO “aayeU 2yTDOds fron ¢ jo voreussosuy oF sz9jar worreWsoyuy sejnonied, yyy sn 03 ynd w99q"~"$04 31 seq ps anamoy texisifoy wonDsiord #eC U9 oq you prnoys sajy Gans 1eHp sf woRUAIUE seo §qUOUILIDAOD HIthe task, it was held, would often fall on administrators who might not have a sp Eelised knowledge of the subject area or documents involved. In order for the extent access to be manageable, the obligations could only be applied in respect of manual systems: cation of relevant information with a minimum of time and costs hrough clear referencing mechanisms within any filing system potentially contain ing personal data the subject of a request for information. Anything less, which, for example, requires the searcher to leaf through files to see what and whethes jon qualifying 2s personal data of the person who has made the here, would bear no resemblance toa computerised search, snot clear whether this conclusion is necessarily supported by the reality of modern atabases. A Google-type search, for example across an organisation's electronic filin tems, might identify a large number of documents in which an applicant’s nam Bppeared—as indeed was at issue in the Durant case, Whilst certainly there could be p obligation on a data controller to read, or request an administrator to read, every piece of paper in the organisation, the level of structure and organisation required jonstrate Iris often stated that hard cases make bad laws. It may also be the case that bad cases jere located ake hard laws. These is no doubt that the judges in Durant were extremely wary Bhat was regarded as an attempt to invoke the provisions of the Data Protection Act #598 for purposes beyond those envisaged by the legislature. It might be noted that i many cases, data of the kind sought by Durant could have been obtained unde: he Freedom of Information Act 2000, although this legislation was not in force at he time his litigation commenced. Given that the Financial Services Authority had Slentified the material relating to Durant’s case in the context of the data protection Proceedings, it might be difficult to refuse any future freedom of information request fn the basis that 3rmation would be excessively difficult to collect. Perhaps the ost intractable problem facing the courts ina case such as this is that there is the clear al, not least from the Data Protection Directive,* that the legislation is concerned Mrith the protection of the right to privacy, yet, as discussed extensively elsewhere, p personal his remains something which is not explicitly protected in the United Kingdom, The © consid Eontent of the right to privacy has long evaded finition. The classic form B intention ition, however, refers to the right ‘to be left alone’, whilst references to the concept iments. A: informational privacy lay stress on the more proactive ability to control the Hdocument and dissemination of personal data. Ifthe right to exercise at least a measure of con- sonal dat rol over the collection and use of personal data is to have any meaning, knowledge of fer might he nature and extent of the information which is held must be a necessary concomi: pponsibil ant. In adopting a restrictive view of the scope of relevant filing systems, the court in Durant pays insufficient regard to the concept of informational privacySsorp ssopyy19.0u ‘swaioysan1A195 uoSs|steN aep BuLago wossed xp uot 24Tes Sspyeuu0 aBessou ayy wio4s wor, wostod aqp aq on passpSsuo> aq keutIOW 94 aes Louw 2¢j us paureiuoo wep feuosiod oep jo 20dso1 ut 2ajjanuo> ayy “saessauu yon JO lnossuistesn suns! Yotypn Jo asodund ajos aya ‘9014198 your tuOxD9p2 40 suoRe>quMUT suos9[a) © Jo surat Aq pamusuen st yep [euosied Surureyu0> aBessous © 2194 annpauig] won sarong ec] amp 02 spea>oyy 94} Ut porelnysod s1nsau TEENS y {no payise> sem Srssoooad at yrs ut zauueUr tp Sut B20 uoryarosip 30 joxttio2 Aue poseassod ays 30 94 wou rast vxep ese paprear aq 1041 JUDY Jo s[242q WO ere passaa0rd om suOAUE EUR “PRET IY WORD2I0zq BEC Bay rapum 1yfinorg asta , lun 4 anastBoy wos2atoud vide] Wl Buty UOD 130%) guoista1cy 31 “papreo1 0s aq OsTe [14 ]WeUNODTP ayp “UOReNyS e YM Wy 3oqTO ITED jp ese passe aq |] uosiad ssoursng oyp ‘stadans s19q) 09 Yn ssapiqnop “pure pay rs 4 [fl womne[iay ay jo worteay|dd ayy 10g Axessad9U wrr99129 ap Te S10199P PUP sx{pa19 [EnprAtpur oj ayes siunos9” 249 UL EIWp ay) Jo.auIOS rex SurMssy “syMOITe B jos v aredaid 0} 2apz0 0] zayndusoo oy wep atp suaysuteN, oy qWeytMOD2e we Aq P912>| Bo aq Aout xogpoys a4p sIeak v a2uQ “xOgao4s [edAraYAT ayy UT parors axe Y>tys fed jo sanard to suos)2esuen Jo s[fei9p spz0291 ow ssoUISNG [TELUS ¥ JO I9ULNO amp ott09 1yStur ajdurexa ery saindwuoa e wa iow op doup YBNoyL use sxo[JorIUOD ere [passe> aq 01 stioszad 304 2]qissod aumnb st a] "mo parse 9q 03 st yrs Suysso>01d Bu jo guarxa pue aime aip aunusoyap 03 AayEge aup 0} Suorouny Azoynreys Jo 2>u8 Besrojied yp Jo uondaox ay vp suontuyap aange oxy jo watuapp 493 au] ro|]0z3009 Pep aM] SE Passel 2q Gps rom axp Sunonpuoa ype poBrey> dousée ay ‘Jou [e1o1>9p we Jo uoReyEdHOD aK Bdusexs 104 aameys Aq parmmbas sasodand soy Ayuo passonoid 258 wep axaysr 9809247 passanoud aq 01 are 20 ‘ane ep [Puosrad york Zou ayy PU IDEs 20} sesoda rmuussiap (tostad so4f0 1s4 GOUTIOD 30 Auto! 40 2uOTE 19K) 2p uoys. Bajjonuos eiep © se posse aq 1H Aised & reyt sopraaid way woRD=IOLd PEC AHL ce Arjununtto9 20 peuoReN 4q pazeusis9p oq Kew wor eULIOU sty 105 eH>9129 9 tie yp 20 rajonuos ou; ‘suoeynBas 20 sxe AyyerenUOD 20 reuoHU Kq pat eHs2}3p anv Sussoo01d jo stead pun sasodind ayy alayas ‘ep yetosiad jo Sussa30rd up Jo Sueaui pur sasodind aq) saumuaiaiap siauno qa} Auto| 20 auope H>IySs KPOG 23430 jue 20 Aaustie qusoxpme ayqind ‘uoszad [e85| Jo yexmeu 24) teaUr eqs J2yfonweD, yeu) sapiaoud axtyoanic ayy, aanoauig pue sey woRD=I0%q rec aq) sepun foro Jo SULZ9} aAssUD}x0 ysous 94 0} 329/qNs 23H sIB]JOsITOD EEC siojjonuo> eeq, s10128 uopparoud weg NOLLOaLOWA VLVG ANY &ering such services will normally be considered controllers in respectof the {the additional personal data necessary for the operation of the service." Bete processors in the example given above, some data controllers may seek to have processi out on their behalf by a third party. This was perhaps more prevalent in the days of computing than isthe case today, although one aspect which remains sig tis where undertakings make arrangements as part of disaster recovery plan in access to external processing facilities in the event of some interruption t ee. Mirroring once again the terminology of the Data Protection Directive, th Protection Act 1998 utilises the term ‘data processor’ which encompasses: ny person (other than an employee ofthe data controller) who processes the data Be phrase in brackets was included to avoid the possiblity that employees engage ‘ourse of their employment might be regarded as data processors. in the expanded definition of processing adopted in the 1998 Act, it will be the $e that anyone who collects data for the processor—pethaps by conducting market Beeearch surveys—will be classed asa processor though a wide range of persons may be classed as data processors, the req Beis imposed on them are limited. Data processors will not be subject to Bessscation requirements," whilst, in respect of the requirement to maintain appropr Be security (now found in the seventh principle), the onusis placed upon the data co hom processing is conducted, The controller is responsible for selecting ‘written con: Peecessor who can provide satisfactory guarant ding security* Hct must also be entered into obliging the processor to act only on instructions from controller in respect of the processing carried out, and also to comply with the Besuirements of the seventh principle."” Further, itis only the data controller who may Be liable to compensate data subjects for losses arising from processing, ** Dats subjects Bata subjects ‘an individual who isthe subject of personal data” It would bea unique Bedividnal who is not to be classed as a data subject—many times over, In contrast toseis Jaquu9yy Jo¥pOUN Jo Aazoyane ue Aq s13Mod sit 3s19"9 01 paisonos 2q Aer Aayioysne yseq -(s2y>ea1g ayeuHia} 0} sounseotd aatzesisture auaKeius 0 Pur ae] 24} Jo suonejols payzadsns ayeBiysaaur 01) 11 uo sod ayn ‘ays s9quoqy timo sy Jo K104332} 3 UO “2s|220%9 01 ‘uoR\sanb U1 Butsso>oNd 941 01 Buide ey euonen ayp soaoyeqn oa.adusoo 5} Aysoyine Laosiazodns yoo eu Joqpany Sopisoud (9)8¢ any ‘sav jeuorEU Jo woneoNdale jeioys2}-224%9 oF pea] Ae UO! nus v yong aes Zaqurayy aqp jo Axoytx19 9 wo sqfos3uo> ay Jo uauuyst aes fe J0 Sofilarioe a Jo 3821409 oy) UT Ino possi st, ulssapaid a104A swe] JeUOT Bide on are savers oquroyy nz 3eyp popraoad sy 24n223IC won}aaIONg HEC] IM UT Teunguy, uoneUEosey p20 siun0> 247 xo}94 parson seq rox sey uor.eaidou sya Jo ssaun201309 af, Boizodia 1 youn wy wioy ayn jo ssoypae8o1—topfry pout oxp ut posn 99! Beep 241 3e4) papuarur star o10ya. Ng peoage no paysse9 axe Burssasoad aun yo syradse avo asa Pauste> 9q rm won>ypstan era souorssrunwTOD aq Aq U9 309 Se S218 au, worst 2 01 29/qns aq axojasays jm oy osn paseg-wopBUTy paltry 40 Joszuoo yea] tp zapum urewau [LM Byep ayy ‘soouEIsUt AuEUL UY “peorge posse srsv3a(qes evep wopSury parup or unejer ep vay asise sur{gord sepjurg won epsr82jaxp Jo asodand ays 10j neaing soynduoo& se paprvox oq keut Suiss0901d axp mo sarsze9(o1qas Supyezopun ays yey ase> op ag ose deur 2soctind Bau 20} 105m evep ese posseps ag as oy. quale 10 yeas, e-4q wopBUry powUn at Bz povwosoidas aq trun wey ag eu “1aprsox paraprsud> ou st Audios ayp yet nd uortexe} 40) 30u ang 19¥ UOHIaO1g eq 241 Jo asodind 94} Bo} wopSury pag arp w yeprsai se papmefos 2q pyino> Auedwio> e poyuauutos sv BUOISSIUNWUOS 2x9 Sy “yIMs01 WWaxaysp 2onpoad deus Y>Iya pe s4xoyH09 Joaquin e BESost1e (ony a0 st wopBuIDy poru ays UE AWopIsax pasapistOD aq tre> Bupyeuzapumn Se sa4p9YM Jo uonsanb oy], sos eIep ayp Jo woneaynivapt a4) Buraq ansst uteu ax Bhs fideo oy uonooiosg exec ay ‘i29/qns ep ueULIeD 20 Youary aKluHExD 10} Sy Sunefer wopBury pau ayy ut passoaoad steep ayaa uorrenyis ayy Up 2aUtistest fn nu BurpseBar suoystaoid sadoang yo uno) axp uate Ayduio> 04 9pu0 ur Lressooou Bes weoidde sip sed uy 4; wop3ury ponup ayy urypio wioxy eyep jouosrad yo osn Pure sjusiu09 2x9 joruo> oye ssasn erep [E03 som\dde, pR6T IV won>eIO14 EIe sanss! jeuonaipstin{ ‘o19Mp pourpyuod su0xz9 dure Bo ton}Da1209 ayp Buymn22s Jo pu si>|}o13U09 Aq poy BIep OF $8209" FutUrEIGO Jo et 2sqnopun st si2o(qns wep 103 1yBts wwersodus yout ayy, “syBU7J9puU09 01 st axmrers $48 J0 asodind atp ‘siaa(qns eiep 10} ‘uoneysr29] ay zapuin pasodun suore2y|qo a4) Bo yon Azan sy S190) 247 2x94 ‘siossaooid pue s19]0s1409 whep tpIA WORRIES 3 NOLLOALOWd VVC ANY XOVARNA | 96THE SCOPE OF DATA PROTECTION | 5 Sadertakings process personal data in a variety of Member States. In its Consultation Paper, the Home Office asserts that There is potential for overlapping jurisdiction in the situation where multinational While some of the provisions relating to geographical extent are clear enough, others ae obscure and potentially ambiguous. Theres, therefore, the potential for inconsist. Co ptedin different Member States. The danger is that this could Possible for the national law of more than one Member State to apply toa single rocessing operation, or for no Member States la so to appl The multiple jurisdiction situation would appear to be an inevitable consequence the free movement of data within the EU. Given that a major purpose of the Data tection Directive* is to harmonise the laws of the Member States, such a result Bould not be excessively burdensome for data users and, indeed, corresponds to the Commissioner's interpretation of the existing situation under domestic law. It is esicult to envisage that a reasonable interpretation of the Directive's terms could Seduce a situation where no national law applied. In implementing the Directive's Bovisions, the Data Protection Act 1998 will apply where: a) the data controller is established in the United Kingdom and the data are proc essed in the context of that establishment; or b) thedata controllerisestablished neitherin the United Kingdom norinany other BEA state but uses equipment in the United Kingdom for processing the data otherwise the purposes of transit throt BBS example of the latter situation m e pment forming part of a Beputer network, perhaps involving an ISP, is located in the United Kingdom but Benaged from the United States. Be question of establishment is defined more precisely than under the Data Bevtection Act 1984. tthe criteria adopted are that the controller satisfies one of the E. The controller isan individual who is ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom, 2 The controller is a body incorporated under United Kingdom law. 3 The controller is a partnership or unincorporated association subject to United Kingdom law, 4 The controller is a person maintaining an office, branch agency, of 1 tice in the United Kingdom. Bei. For multinational companies, itis the case that they will be regarded as estab. intervene hed in every country in which they operate. The geographical location of any data may be tion Th vent Ps305 parie> st suoyssoad upyeus on yprosdde ausodind y-uewsyesp Azewwourer ed a 04) parade jt st yeu aBenize o o8n aqp uy uossfaad gp 203 400] 07 HE dod you st aaniastcy axp 40 Supiossaxp paydope ‘asnsvaut a8] uy 'sey .>¥ at 1 saouuaqjang ‘San20s%C aia Ga 2UaisstoD st ey Aue W UL parasson yss0d pr plnoys [9661 PY UoRIeo0d #2] Y 18 unvelone Prec] 2aH28s1C1 ay) 61 Yoo] 0} arendoxdde stay 13y aqy Sunadsoqut Oy 2 3 [249510 DTSIAARNLW HLIOM Jo SAAT PLOT op NOWA 5 up-asroaudaay raypes are eq Sip] pazodnuzosd seu ypryps‘aunyeys89j aya Aq paases pt wo99q sdeqaad aavy s14T0> 2 uty 210}2q ans suits A03d attystBo de oy stzn02 a Joye 34p APE] 81 sayeag 1aq Uap (1 2 $8010" ,.24112231C on2ajo2g vec axp Jo ado3s 4p 0} ypordde juaysisu0> pure aaysueyudiuo> & apraoad fo r9pr0 Ut Azessa20u 9g [Ja 11N07 weadoung axp Jo suorstDap JoqaTy yeIp aq [jm ABE j] ypeoudde anpotses s10un zoyyer ® 001 [paddy Jo LINO OU ge HHOHIMY sI7EAAS Downing a jain] W] uoRe|sTBaq aq Jo ado>s aup Jo Mara anysuedxa we padope 120) Headosnyy 33 ,-IS!4DpUtT ptpog U Suunod ayy Aq pouTurex aq oy unBoq sey LON] 6189] a4) Jo adons ayy, woReye8a] aqy Aq poutaad’ aq ose 9 aueTaasms JO SULO} Bsox) yo Areun ye wea po ‘syejd-saqumu x69 paapur Ho piouse> o9pra uo pasmn Bre soBeurt soy sfenpratput jo woneayriuapr anewone ayy Bupnutzad se yons “Bo jose wr sysatudojaxop ‘soBurey> [ea] 00 vOREpD 61 BV WoR>sIONg eIECL a Espum ase> axp sem ueyp samtanoe jo 3 e curaao8 gg6t 19 woRDaIO2d PICT sit ex qnop THs 2H94h ‘SuONFABap 2Iseq SH Jo.aI0S Jo aNIeU Popuedro at suojsnpuo pasjozoxo oq 14s Suonauny asoxp y>rye WAU on Supper areas yo Kx .a1299 amp Aq apeur aq eur zepxo we yeER SopIAOIE B66T > fronoaiong ewe] au), Buwssanord syy Jo Aueso] gy Suruyayap wy wey wecasa Adc pure wropBury pamrun aq wi ano patie suazny> wews95 0 Sureyes Suss2200d Buy predo1 {qiowne Auostasadns weuniey oyp 4q apeut sornbut dure ssse 0 paBlygo 24 prom souosssrunuo) won| a9}e1g ee a YU 94 TE 1299 DU], "SIS 8H JO PEAIO Sa] feuoryetr af Yap Afdtu09 0} paou pa WopBuPy porUN 243 PE 195 92a mr aydurexa 20} “paysiygese kueduro> ¥ -yuRAs[ax 9q 10U TEM uoNerado Buss2203d Nom4L0ud Viva GNY xovAnta | &Even the most purposive form of interpretation cannot and should not provide Be excuse for unfettered judicial decision-making. Beyond issues of ambiguity and Sek of precision in the drafting of the legislation, the Directive and the Act are to a Eecsiderable extent surviving dinosaurs from the age when computers were mainly Beestanding machines, used almost exclusively by businesses and large organisations Bet with limited networking capabilities. The world has moved on and, whilst the Beropean Court was undoubtedly correct in determining that the development of es page constituted processing as defined in the legislation, it is dificult to see that Be and « myriad of other pages maintained by individuals effectively by way of @ Bobi, constitute a sufficiently serious threat to the rights and freedoms of other indi eduals to justify the imposition of criminal sanctions. As will be discussed in Chapter B ithe legislation does not apply where processing is for social or domestic purposes. ee probiem, which arises also in the context of copyright infringement, is that what Heed to be clearcut distinctions, not east in terms of the scale of activities possible, are Beionger applicable. The old models are broken but the form oftheir replacements has Bet to be resolved in a satisfactory manner. Suggestions for further reading 29 Working Party Opinion No, Information Commissioner's Off 4720 cept of Personal Data 1 on the Data Protectio 2007),