header-logo header-logo

23 April 2009
Issue: 7366 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection , Freedom of Information
printer mail-detail

Commission takes on UK privacy laws in Phorm action

UK authorities urged to change national laws after privacy infringement

The European Commission has launched an infringement proceeding against the UK after complaints by internet users against online advertising company Phorm.

The Commission alleges the UK failed to comply with EU e-privacy and personal data protection rules by allowing Phorm to track internet users’ web-surfing patterns to determine their interests and then deliver targeted advertising, without customers’ consent.

BT allowed Phorm to trial its services in 2006 and 2007, without informing customers.

EU telecoms commissioner Viviane Reding called on the UK authorities to “change their national laws and ensure that national authorities are duly empowered and have proper sanctions at their disposal”.

It is an offence to unlawfully intercept communications, but only where interception is “intentional”, and not if the interceptor has “reasonable grounds for believing” that consent to interception has been given.

Sarah Needham, solicitor at Macfarlanes LLP, says: “It is unclear whether the Phorm service contravenes EU or UK privacy laws.

“This is because they all revolve around a ‘consent’ regime without further detailing what is meant by this and whether this would include a clearly worded opt out regime,” she says.

One possibility, Needham says, is that the Phorm service may be “legitimised” if the user has consented to use of their data in this way, although EU and UK data protection laws are unclear on what this requires.

“The law is entirely clear that internet users must be told at the time their data is collected by ISPs what it will be used for.

“It seems that Phorm is planning on including this information as part of its launch. The best way for consumers to avoid unwanted Phorm activity is therefore to read privacy policies carefully,” she adds.

The Incorporated Society of British Advertisers wants the Commission to withdraw its legal challenge, saying selfregulation is the best way to address the issue.

The UK now has two months to reply. The Commission can then issue a reasoned opinion and, if still dissatisfied, refer the case to the European Court of Justice.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll