Data protection regime—DPA 1998

ARCHIVED:This Overview provides information on the data protection regime before 25 May 2018 and reflects the position under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998) and Directive 95/46/EC (the Data Protection Directive). This Overview is for background information only and is not maintained.

Prior to the 25 May 2018, the DPA 1998 governed the processing of personal data in the UK. It incorporated the provisions of the Data Protection Directive into UK law and obliged those handling personal data to comply with eight core data protection principles (discussed below), giving individuals a number of rights in relation to information that is about them, including a right of access.

The General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR) was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 4 May 2016. The provisions of the GDPR are directly applicable and fully enforceable in all EU Member States from 25 May 2018 and it replaces DPA 1998 and Data Protection Directive. For more information, see Practice Note: Introduction to the EU GDPR and UK GDPR.

Position under the DPA 1998

Background

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Information Law News

The construction of jurisdiction clauses in the context of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 and the mechanisms of service(Campeau v Gottex Real Asset Fund 1 (OE) Waste S.À.R.L)

Dispute Resolution analysis: This case considers a jurisdictional clause in the context of service under CPR 6.33(2B)(b), which allows service out of the jurisdiction where the defendant is party to a jurisdiction clause. There is no corresponding requirement for the claimant to be a party to that jurisdiction clause. The starting point is that jurisdiction clauses are not generally intended to concern disputes with third parties. However, that is no more than a starting point and one which can be departed from in appropriate cases. This was one such appropriate case whereby the circumstances and construction of the clause led to the finding that it did include the third party claimant’s (Mr Campeau) claim. While not strictly necessary given the judge’s findings in relation to the construction of the clause, Mr Justice Butcher considered that, where a jurisdictional clause was wide enough to encompass disputes from third parties, then it will likely also amount to a ‘relevant term’ for the purposes of section 1(4) of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (C(RTP)A 1999). That meant that the third party, in seeking to enforce their rights under the SPA, was statutorily obliged to do so in England and so could rely upon CPR 6.33 (2B) (b) in that respect also. Written by Georgia Whiting, legal counsel (contentious construction) at Capita.

View Information Law by content type :

Popular documents