Driver v Crown Prosecution Service [2022] EWHC 2500 (KB) (10 October 2022)

Driver v Crown Prosecution Service [2022] EWHC 2500 (KB) (10 October 2022)

The June 2019 CPS email contained the claimant's personal data as it indirectly identified him as a suspect in Operation Sheridan; its disclosure to a member of the public constituted unlawful processing under Part 3 DPA 2018. The information was biographical and had the claimant as its focus. The claimant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information, and the disclosure was not justified. Damages for distress are appropriate.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2500 (KB)
Parties
Claimant: Geoffrey Driver; Defendant: Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Data Protection, Misuse of Private Information, Human Rights / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed in part
Legal Topics
GDPR, Data Protection Act 2018, Misuse of Private Information, Article 8 ECHR, Law Enforcement Processing
Data Protection Privacy Human Rights GDPR Data Protection Act 2018 Misuse of Private Information Article 8 ECHR Law Enforcement Processing

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Geoffrey Driver

Claimant

Crown Prosecution Service

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Data Protection, Misuse of Private Information, Human Rights / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the June 2019 CPS email contained the claimant's personal data
  2. 2 Whether sending the email constituted unlawful processing under DPA 2018
  3. 3 Whether the email contained private information with a reasonable expectation of privacy

Ratio Decidendi

The June 2019 CPS email contained the claimant's personal data as it indirectly identified him as a suspect in Operation Sheridan; its disclosure to a member of the public constituted unlawful processing under Part 3 DPA 2018. The information was biographical and had the claimant as its focus. The claimant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information, and the disclosure was not justified. Damages for distress are appropriate.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part

Orders

  • Declaration that the CPS breached the Data Protection Act 2018 by unlawful processing of the claimant's personal data
  • Award of damages for distress not exceeding £2,000