header-logo header-logo

15 February 2009
Issue: 7260 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection
printer mail-detail

Trading in personal data could mean jail

Private detectives and journalists who misuse personal data could be jailed in future.

Last week, the Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) announced it would be amending s 60 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998) to raise the punishment to up to six months imprisonment on summary conviction, and up to two years imprisonment on conviction on indictment.

Currently, it is an offence punishable by a fine of up to £5,000 on summary conviction or unlimited on conviction on indictment, under s 55 of the Act for anyone “to sell or offer to sell personal data which has been (or is subsequently) obtained/ procured knowingly or recklessly without the consent of the data controller”.

The amendments follow concernsraised in the DCA consultation paper, Increasing Penalties for Deliberate and Wilful Misuse of Personal Data, launched last July, and in an earlier information Commissioner’s Office report that existing penalties were an insufficiently strong deterrent.

Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, says: “A custodial sentence will act as a deterrent for individuals who are tempted to obtain or disclose personal information unlawfully.”

Data protection specialist Peter Carey, editor of the Privacy and Data Protection Journal, says he expects custodial sentences will be reserved for repeat and serious offenders.

“I think the courts will welcome the extra power that they will have and will use it appropriately. I support the use of custodial sentences because some of the things done which give rise to the offence are very serious invasions of people’s privacy.

“Section 55 is very specific and narrowly drawn and should not inhibit normal investigative journalism although some tabloid journalists who take things too far will be at risk as will private detectives who operate in an unlawful way.”

A spokesperson from the human rights group Liberty says: “Data protection rights are very important and this increased penalty, provided it is not used unnecessarily, doesn’t alarm us unduly.”
 

Issue: 7260 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

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