*/
In a two part feature, Graham Cunningham looks at the new guidelines on Information Security; in part 1, he examines the guidelines regarding electronic devices.
There is good news; and there is bad news. The good news is that there are only two or three barristers on the ‘ICO list’. The bad news, in these harsh economic times, is that you could be spending a lot of your increasingly hard-earned cash on paying administrative penalties to the Government.
To what am I alluding? The following is a true story. A barrister went away on holiday, leaving her home in the care of two plumbers who were fitting a new boiler. She stressed the need for them to secure the premises and set the alarm when they had finished work. When she returned from holiday, her purse and laptop were missing.
Unfortunately, the laptop contained highly sensitive information about people she was representing and it had insufficient technical security to protect such information. This resulted - in this instance - in an undertaking given to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) rather than a penalty (‘the list’). However, there is no guarantee that the ICO will continue to be satisfied with an undertaking. Just to put the matter in sobering perspective, the maximum penalty for the worst cases is currently £500,000, and the Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund (BMIF) has indicated that its policy does not automatically cover such penalties. In other words, you literally cannot afford to ignore this.
The basics
What do you need to know? Let me start with the basics:
The recommendations
All very interesting, you will say, but what do you actually have to do? Your Bar Council IT panel has drafted “Guidelines on Information Security” which is a splendid read if you have time. Since most of you don’t have the time, I will summarise its “Recommendations”:
Next month, information security for physical materials.
Graham Cunningham, Hardwicke Chambers, with contributions from Iain Mitchell QC, Clive Freedman and Jacqueline Reid of the Bar Council IT Panel
To what am I alluding? The following is a true story. A barrister went away on holiday, leaving her home in the care of two plumbers who were fitting a new boiler. She stressed the need for them to secure the premises and set the alarm when they had finished work. When she returned from holiday, her purse and laptop were missing.
Unfortunately, the laptop contained highly sensitive information about people she was representing and it had insufficient technical security to protect such information. This resulted - in this instance - in an undertaking given to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) rather than a penalty (‘the list’). However, there is no guarantee that the ICO will continue to be satisfied with an undertaking. Just to put the matter in sobering perspective, the maximum penalty for the worst cases is currently £500,000, and the Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund (BMIF) has indicated that its policy does not automatically cover such penalties. In other words, you literally cannot afford to ignore this.
The basics
What do you need to know? Let me start with the basics:
The recommendations
All very interesting, you will say, but what do you actually have to do? Your Bar Council IT panel has drafted “Guidelines on Information Security” which is a splendid read if you have time. Since most of you don’t have the time, I will summarise its “Recommendations”:
Next month, information security for physical materials.
Graham Cunningham, Hardwicke Chambers, with contributions from Iain Mitchell QC, Clive Freedman and Jacqueline Reid of the Bar Council IT Panel
In a two part feature, Graham Cunningham looks at the new guidelines on Information Security; in part 1, he examines the guidelines regarding electronic devices.
There is good news; and there is bad news. The good news is that there are only two or three barristers on the ‘ICO list’. The bad news, in these harsh economic times, is that you could be spending a lot of your increasingly hard-earned cash on paying administrative penalties to the Government.
Update from the Chair of the Bar
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
Unlocking your aged debt to fund your tax in one easy step. By Philip N Bristow
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, discusses the upcoming changes to pensions and Inheritance Tax and the potential impact on your financial future
Save the Children UK is the latest charity to benefit from a £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
The Chief Legal Officer to the Metropolitan Police, barrister Brett Welch, tells Anthony Inglese CB about his mission and the work to turn the Met around
Barrister apprenticeships – shortly to provide the fourth pathway to the Bar – are an ideal opportunity to support local talent and ‘grow your own’, say Tim Coulson and Dr Jane Dennehy
Born from a grievance, their research project grew into a book and is now challenging the status quo. Emma Price and Emma-Louise Fenelon reveal the key findings – and the critical next steps
Grok around and find out – or not? Mariya Peykova investigates the nudification scandal, what the law has to say about sexually explicit deepfakes, and whether stronger regulation is needed
Oliver Lewis spotlights an overlooked yet rapidly evolving area of law – coercive and controlling behaviour within care contexts