Sofola v Lloyds TSB Bank [2005] EWHC 1335 (QB) (27 June 2005)

Sofola v Lloyds TSB Bank [2005] EWHC 1335 (QB) (27 June 2005)

Given the absence of reasons from the lower courts, the mistaken belief that the 1996 record had been deleted, and the arguable basis for claims under ss.13 and 14 of the Data Protection Act 1998, the appeal should be re-opened and allowed to proceed on those points, as well as on the slander claim. The claims are not bound to fail and require further investigation at trial.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 1335 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Abayomi Sofola; Defendant: Lloyds TSB Bank
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 June 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Summary Judgment; Application to Re Open Appeal
Outcome
Appeal re-opened and allowed in relation to claims under ss.13 and 14 of the Data Protection Act 1998 and the slander claim; matter to proceed to trial on those points.
Legal Topics
Data Protection Act 1998, Qualified Privilege, Summary Judgment, Rectification of Data, Compensation for Damage, Slander, Malicious Falsehood
Data Protection Defamation Civil Procedure Data Protection Act 1998 Qualified Privilege Summary Judgment Rectification of Data Compensation for Damage +2 more

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abayomi Sofola

Claimant

Lloyds TSB Bank

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Summary Judgment; Application to Re Open Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Bank's retention and disclosure of inaccurate personal data breached the Data Protection Act 1998
  2. 2 Whether the Bank's statements to the police constituted slander or malicious falsehood
  3. 3 Whether the claim for compensation under s.13 and rectification under s.14 of the Data Protection Act 1998 had a real prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

Given the absence of reasons from the lower courts, the mistaken belief that the 1996 record had been deleted, and the arguable basis for claims under ss.13 and 14 of the Data Protection Act 1998, the appeal should be re-opened and allowed to proceed on those points, as well as on the slander claim. The claims are not bound to fail and require further investigation at trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal re-opened and allowed in relation to claims under ss.13 and 14 of the Data Protection Act 1998 and the slander claim; matter to proceed to trial on those points.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted and appeal allowed on claims under ss.13 and 14 of the Data Protection Act 1998 and slander.
  • Case to proceed to disclosure and exchange of witness statements on these issues.