(1) The controller must designate a data protection officer, unless the controller is a court, or other judicial authority, acting in its judicial capacity.
(2) When designating a data protection officer, the controller must have regard to the professional qualities of the proposed officer, in particular—
(a) the proposed officer's expert knowledge of data protection law and practice, and
(b) the ability of the proposed officer to perform the tasks mentioned in section 71.
(3) The same person may be designated as a data protection officer by several controllers, taking account of their organisational structure and size.
(4) The controller must publish
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
This Practice Note considers the legal concept of mistake in contract law. It examines common mistake, mutual mistake, unilateral mistake, mistake as to identity and mistake as to the document signed (non est factum). It also considers the impact of each of these types of mistake on the contract and
Part 8 of the Corporation Tax Act 2009 (CTA 2009) is a specific corporation tax regime that applies exclusively to the gains and losses of intangible fixed assets. Note, however, that certain intangible fixed assets are excluded from the regime, see Practice Note: Excluded intangible fixed
An intention to create legal relations is requiredThere are various situations in which a court will hold that an agreement is not binding because, though supported by consideration, it was made without any intention of creating legal relations (see, eg, Blue v Ashley).Did the parties intend to
This Practice Note considers the doctrine of forum non conveniens, also referred to as the appropriate forum or the proper place for a dispute to be determined. This doctrine is of relevance when determining whether the courts of England and Wales have jurisdiction to hear a dispute and is applied
0330 161 1234
To view the latest version of this document and millions of others like it, sign-in to LexisLibrary or register for a free trial.