Information Technology Law Reports - Volume 19 - Issue 3


This issue of Information Technology Law Reports contains three cases. The first R (on the application of Emblin) v Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs concerned a claim for judicial review with regard to allegations of inducement to breach confidence and inducement to breach legal professional privilege. The decision is significant for its analysis of the law of inducement of breach of confidence; its acceptance that information concerning the combating of tax avoidance may fall within the maxim no confidence in iniquity; and its analysis of the application of the statutory defence to a claim for inducing breach of confidence in section 316B Finance Act 2004. The second case, Unabhängiges Landeszentrum für Datenschutz Schleswig-Holstein v Wirtschaftsakademie Schleswig-Holstein GmbH concerned data protection. The decision approached who was a ‘controller’ under Article 2(d) of Directive 95/46 broadly so as to ensure there was an effective protection of data subjects. The decision highlighted the need for there to be a fact-sensitive assessment of the tasks performed by each controller at different stages of the data processing. The administrators of fan pages need to notify data subjects and/or obtain their consent rather than relying on the social networking platform to do so. Lastly, the concept of ‘joint control’ is now found in Article 26 GDPR, which requires joint controllers to determine their respective responsibilities for compliance in a transparent manner and make this arrangement available to data subjects. The third case, Hemsworth (formerly ‘SWS’) v Department for Work and Pensions, considered the circumstances in which a person might make a statement in open court anonymously.

Richard Budworth
Editor, Information Technology Law Reports

R (on the application of Emblin) Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs
High Court of Justice
Queen’s Bench Division 
Administrative Court 
Whipple J
23 March 2018
[2018] EWHC 626 (Admin)

Judicial review – breach of confidence – legal professional privilege – tax avoidance arrangements – alternative remedies – whether breach of  confidence induced – section 316B Finance Act 2004 – Data Protection Act 1998 – claim dismissed. 

Unabhängiges Landeszentrum für Datenschutz Schleswig-Holstein Wirtschaftsakademie Schleswig Holstein GmbH
CJEU Grand Chamber 
K.Lenaerts (President), A. Tizzano (Vice-President), M. Ilesic, L.Bay  Larsen, T.von Danwitz, A. Rosas, J.Malenovsky and E.Levits (Presidents of Chambers), E.Juhasz, A. Borg Barthet, F.Biltgen, K. Jurimae, C. Lycurgos.  M. Vilaras and E. Regan
5 June 2018 

Data protection – data controller – administrator of Facebook fan page – social  network  –  joint  responsibility  –  Directive  95/46/EC  ‒  processing  of personal data – applicable national law – supervisory authorities ‒ preliminary ruling. 

Hemsworth (formerly ‘SWS’) Department for Work and Pensions 
High Court of Justice
Queen’s Bench Division 
Warby J
14 September 2018 
[2018] EWHC 2282 (QB)

Private information – breach of confidence – misuse of private information  – statement in open court – anonymity – Data Protection Act 1998 – Human  Rights Act 1998 – application dismissed.