*/
Do we need protection from data protection? asks David Taylor as he warns barristers of their duties under the Data Protection Act 1988 .
Barristers and their chambers can no longer be complacent about their duties under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA), and fines of up to £500,000 are now within the power of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Worse still: if you fight your corner in court, then unlimited fines and up to five years in prison are added to the armoury. If that weren’t incentive enough to keep your data safe, many breaches of the act are also criminal offences of strict liability.
There’s no doubt that we’ve enjoyed a honeymoon period while the ICO gave us all time to come to grips with our responsibilities under the act. This period of grace is now over, and 2011 saw action taken against barristers for what many might see as “blameless” breaches. One barrister left a case containing her papers on a train, and another had her papers stolen from a locked car. In November 2011, a QC had her unencrypted laptop stolen from her locked home - and only avoided a fine because the relevant breach occurred in 2010, before the ICO received its new powers.
All three were issued with undertakings from the ICO to improve their security measures. Although fines were avoided, damage to reputation is always very difficult to value. The Bar Council clearly recognises that practices must change, and the new and improved BARMARK standard due for launch in April puts a far greater emphasis on DPA compliance. Much of the personal data held by counsel is sensitive personal data, so the stakes are high.
In other sectors, fines of between £60,000 and £130,000 have been issued for breaches such as the loss of an unencrypted laptop, an email sent to the incorrect recipient, and a letter inadvertently collected from a shared printer and posted to the wrong recipient.
Individual barristers
For the individual barrister, the steps required to minimise your liability are straightforward.
Notification (registration) with the ICO is a legal requirement. The ICO has made notification easy with the template ‘N812 - Individual barrister’, and this will suffice for most. The two greatest risks of breach are loss of personal data and distribution of data to unauthorised persons.
You should assess the potential consequences of a breach by considering the sensitivity of the personal data you’re handling, and implement protective measures accordingly. Sensitive personal data (for example, your client’s social worker’s report) would warrant much greater security than their name and address, and the following steps should be in place:
When you no longer need to hold onto personal data
You cannot keep a client’s personal data indefinitely or, indeed, longer than necessary. You should have a system for deciding when data is destroyed or archived. When an electronic device comes to the end of its life, you must have all of the data securely destroyed. There are software products which can do this, but the best option is to use a company which will provide a certificate of secure destruction.
You are responsible for others’ actions
As the data controller, you’re entirely responsible for the personal data that you process - and which others (eg clerks) process on your behalf. So make sure everybody fully understands their responsibilities.
Chambers
Chambers have many of the same risks and responsibilities as the individual barrister, but with additional hazards.
Notification for chambers is more complex and depends on their administrative or commercial structure. For those chambers with the traditional model of a self-employed senior clerk taking a commission, the clerk is the data controller. However, the majority of chambers now employ all their staff, in which case the head of chambers is the data controller. Other business models may differ. The ICO website has a very helpful document: “The Data Protection Act 1998 Notification of Barristers’ Chambers”, which explains in detail which notification version applies to you.
Common notification errors are:
Governance
Make sure you have a robust information governance policy, and that everyone has read and understands it; the same goes for your data-breach and privacy policies. These documents form the foundation for data-protection training.
It is essential to have data processing contracts with any data processors you use (the most common would be an external accountant used for payroll). In the event of a breach, the ICO will prosecute you, not the accountant, even if it’s their fault! The data processing contract is a legal requirement under the act and provides you with, inter alia, warranties and guarantees should the data processor fail to comply.
IT
Avoiding common errors
Email and fax policies are critically important, and you should ensure that staff never stray from them:
Human resources
Human resources is a veritable rats’ nest of potential breaches!
Summary
The consequences of not complying with the act may be daunting, but making the necessary changes needn’t be. Having the appropriate systems in place (and following them) provides good mitigation when mistakes do happen.
David Taylor, Data Protection Consultancy Ltd.
There’s no doubt that we’ve enjoyed a honeymoon period while the ICO gave us all time to come to grips with our responsibilities under the act. This period of grace is now over, and 2011 saw action taken against barristers for what many might see as “blameless” breaches. One barrister left a case containing her papers on a train, and another had her papers stolen from a locked car. In November 2011, a QC had her unencrypted laptop stolen from her locked home - and only avoided a fine because the relevant breach occurred in 2010, before the ICO received its new powers.
All three were issued with undertakings from the ICO to improve their security measures. Although fines were avoided, damage to reputation is always very difficult to value. The Bar Council clearly recognises that practices must change, and the new and improved BARMARK standard due for launch in April puts a far greater emphasis on DPA compliance. Much of the personal data held by counsel is sensitive personal data, so the stakes are high.
In other sectors, fines of between £60,000 and £130,000 have been issued for breaches such as the loss of an unencrypted laptop, an email sent to the incorrect recipient, and a letter inadvertently collected from a shared printer and posted to the wrong recipient.
Individual barristers
For the individual barrister, the steps required to minimise your liability are straightforward.
Notification (registration) with the ICO is a legal requirement. The ICO has made notification easy with the template ‘N812 - Individual barrister’, and this will suffice for most. The two greatest risks of breach are loss of personal data and distribution of data to unauthorised persons.
You should assess the potential consequences of a breach by considering the sensitivity of the personal data you’re handling, and implement protective measures accordingly. Sensitive personal data (for example, your client’s social worker’s report) would warrant much greater security than their name and address, and the following steps should be in place:
When you no longer need to hold onto personal data
You cannot keep a client’s personal data indefinitely or, indeed, longer than necessary. You should have a system for deciding when data is destroyed or archived. When an electronic device comes to the end of its life, you must have all of the data securely destroyed. There are software products which can do this, but the best option is to use a company which will provide a certificate of secure destruction.
You are responsible for others’ actions
As the data controller, you’re entirely responsible for the personal data that you process - and which others (eg clerks) process on your behalf. So make sure everybody fully understands their responsibilities.
Chambers
Chambers have many of the same risks and responsibilities as the individual barrister, but with additional hazards.
Notification for chambers is more complex and depends on their administrative or commercial structure. For those chambers with the traditional model of a self-employed senior clerk taking a commission, the clerk is the data controller. However, the majority of chambers now employ all their staff, in which case the head of chambers is the data controller. Other business models may differ. The ICO website has a very helpful document: “The Data Protection Act 1998 Notification of Barristers’ Chambers”, which explains in detail which notification version applies to you.
Common notification errors are:
Governance
Make sure you have a robust information governance policy, and that everyone has read and understands it; the same goes for your data-breach and privacy policies. These documents form the foundation for data-protection training.
It is essential to have data processing contracts with any data processors you use (the most common would be an external accountant used for payroll). In the event of a breach, the ICO will prosecute you, not the accountant, even if it’s their fault! The data processing contract is a legal requirement under the act and provides you with, inter alia, warranties and guarantees should the data processor fail to comply.
IT
Avoiding common errors
Email and fax policies are critically important, and you should ensure that staff never stray from them:
Human resources
Human resources is a veritable rats’ nest of potential breaches!
Summary
The consequences of not complying with the act may be daunting, but making the necessary changes needn’t be. Having the appropriate systems in place (and following them) provides good mitigation when mistakes do happen.
David Taylor, Data Protection Consultancy Ltd.
Do we need protection from data protection? asks David Taylor as he warns barristers of their duties under the Data Protection Act 1988.
Barristers and their chambers can no longer be complacent about their duties under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA), and fines of up to £500,000 are now within the power of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Worse still: if you fight your corner in court, then unlimited fines and up to five years in prison are added to the armoury. If that weren’t incentive enough to keep your data safe, many breaches of the act are also criminal offences of strict liability.
The Chair of the Bar reports back
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, explains how global events can influence the performance of pensions and ISAs, and why taking a long-term approach to investing is often the most effective strategy
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, discusses what family law professionals need to know about hallucinogens, from the main hallucinogenic drugs encountered in family proceedings, to their effects and the testing options available
Harmony Christian Ministries is the latest charity to benefit from a £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
By David Green
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, examines the forensic science underpinning hair drug testing, its evidential scope and limitations, and why it remains the gold standard for evidencing patterns of drug use in family proceedings
Developing a tech start-up demands a different definition of excellence to the Bar, says Saara Idelbi. The co-creator of Advocatr on entrepreneurship, AI advocacy training, and matching the thrill of a killer cross-examination
At the start of her term, Chair of the Bar 2026 Kirsty Brimelow KC set out a series of priorities for the year ahead. One of those priorities was children in the justice system
As the world becomes more digital, Barbara Vinagre Mota examines international research into the mental health consequences of judges’ exposure to graphic and immersive evidence, highlighting the importance of support systems
Reviewed by Daniel Barnett
James McNeill Whistler at Tate Britain until 27 September Rothko in Florence at Palazzo Strozzi until 23 August Reviewed by Stephen Cragg KC