Our People
Paper star
Cutting Through Complexity

“To disclose or not to disclose – that is the key question”…

17th December 2015

In Part 1 of our series we wrote about what to do when you receive a subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1996 (“DPA”). Now turning to your response to a request, the DPA provides exemptions which you may be able to apply in order to withhold certain types personal data. The most common exemptions which may apply are:

  1. Confidential references given by the data controller. A ‘request’ must however be complied with in relation to a reference received by a data controller (for example, a new employer), subject of course to the rules on disclosure of third party information.
  2. Personal data processed in connection with management forecasting or planning, to the extent that any disclosure would prejudice the conduct of the business. i.e if information on a staff redundancy programme is disclosed in advance of it being announced to the rest of the workforce.
  3. Personal data relating to negotiations between the data controller and the employee, to the extent that any disclosure would be likely to prejudice those negotiations i.e. any internal pre-settlement discussions relating to the company’s intention/position, before a settlement has been signed.
  4. Personal data subject to legal professional privilege. Legal advice privilege covers confidential communication between a lawyer and their client for the purpose of seeking or giving legal advice. Litigation privilege would apply where the communication comes into existence for the dominant purpose of being used in connection with actual or pending litigation. Neither of these are likely to apply if a lawyer is just being ‘cc-ed’ into emails in the hope that it will apply!

Summary: It is important to keep a detailed record of all data which was identified as being within scope, data disclosed and data not disclosed. Keep a clear record of why certain data has not been disclosed and the exemption applied. If contested, this evidence and your reasoning will be key.

Although a recent case held that disclosure was not required where it was not reasonable or proportionate to carry out the search for personal data, this runs very much contrary to the general stance taken by the Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”). We would advise that taking such a position is risky; the employee making the request may very well challenge your position with the ICO and the time and costs involved in dealing with the challenge may outweigh the savings you might have made in not responding to the request.

 

The contents of this newsletter are intended as guidance for readers. It can be no substitute for specific advice. Consequently we cannot accept responsibility for this information, errors or matters affected by subsequent changes in the law, or the content of any website referred to in this newsletter. © Mundays LLP 2015.

Latest News

Mundays recognised in Chambers and Partners UK 2019
Friday 2nd November 2018

Lawyers and practice areas have been recommended in Chambers and Partners UK 2019

Read More

Mundays recognised in The Legal 500 UK 2018
Thursday 1st November 2018

We are delighted to announce that we have once again been recommended in The Legal 500 2018 UK.

Read More

Real Liability
Thursday 1st November 2018

Andrew Knorpel reviews the busy last few weeks of employment-related cases heard by The Court of Appeal

Read More