header-logo header-logo

09 June 2011
Issue: 7469 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Cookie consent required

Companies and individuals who use cookies without asking first could be fined up to £500,000 under a new law.

Cookies are information files stored on the computer of a person visiting a website, and can be used to identify repeat visitors. Previously, operators of websites using cookies were required to tell browsers how the cookie was being used and how they could opt-out if they objected. However, recent changes to the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003 mean cookies can only be placed on machines where the user has given consent. An exception may be made where the cookie is “strictly necessary” for a service requested by the user.

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), which has issued guidance on the change, has powers to issue fines of up to £500,000 for breaches of the new law.

Tom Morrison, partner at Rollits, says: “The law has now changed and the ICO will undoubtedly start receiving complaints about websites straight away. 

“It is not in a position to simply ignore those complaints. While it has been widely publicised that the ICO will not will be issuing fines specifically for cookie breaches until May 2012, it has been less widely reported that there is an enforcement mechanism in place effective immediately centred around the use of warning notices.

“If you receive a warning notice before May 2012 and a complaint is received after that date you will be at a significantly heightened risk of receiving a fine.”

Issue: 7469 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

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
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
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll