Search results
68 results ordered by
ICO warns UK’s most visited websites to improve cookie choices
What steps is the ICO taking to ensure that website cookie banners are compliant with law?
Read moreNew Development: EU Data Act published in Official Journal
The EU Data Act (the Act) came into force on 11 January 2024. The Act sets out rules regarding the fair access to and use of data, aiming to enhance the data economy for individuals and businesses by overcoming barriers to data sharing and establishing frameworks around data access and use.
Read moreICO fines HelloFresh £140,000 after 7-month spam marketing campaign
Where did HelloFresh go wrong with their email and text marketing campaign and what lessons can be learned from the ICO’s investigation and subsequent fine?
Read moreICO issues preliminary enforcement notice against Snap for its “My AI” Chatbot
How can organisations who wish to join to the world of generative AI ensure that they adequately assess the risks from the perspective of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO)?
Read moreNew Development: EDPB provides clarification on tracking techniques covered by the ePrivacy Directive
On 14 November 2023, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) adopted a set of new guidelines (the Guidelines) on the technical scope of Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive (the ePD).
Read moreClearview AI cleared of £7.5m ICO fine for processing data outside the UK
Just how did the processing of personal data by Clearview AI (Clearview) fall outside the scope of UK GDPR?
Read moreICO publishes guidance to ensure lawful monitoring in the workplace
How can employers monitor their workers whilst maintaining their trust and complying with data protection regulation?
Read moreICO publishes its draft “Data Protection Fining Guidance” for public consultation
How will the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) calculate the amount of a fine under the UK GPDR and the Data Protection Act (DPA) 2018?
Read moreEU Advocate General’s opinion on data subjects’ rights to compensation for non-material damage under the GDPR
Does the theft of an individual’s sensitive personal data by a wrongdoer give rise to compensation for non-material damage under Article 82 EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), if the wrongdoer has not used, or taken steps to use, the sensitive personal data for any purpose?
Read moreICO updates its guidance on AI and data protection
What are the key data protection principles which the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) expects organisations to follow when integrating AI into their product and service offerings?
Read moreWhat To Know About AI Fraudsters Before Facing Disputes
Fraudsters are quick to weaponise new technological developments and artificial intelligence is proving no exception, with AI-assisted scams increasingly being reported in the news, including most recently one using a likeness of a BBC broadcaster.
Read moreThe High Court continues interim anti-harassment injunction
At a return date hearing on 12 July 2024, Aidan Eardley KC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) continued until trial or further order an anti-harassment injunction granted to prevent the Defendant from, amongst other things, approaching or contacting the Claimant.
Read moreThe Supreme Court clarifies the law on the recovery of damages for non-pecuniary damage arising out of a maliciously false statement
The Claimant was an employee of the second defendant, LCA, a recruitment agency owned and operated by the first defendant. After leaving LCA, the Claimant was employed by another recruitment agency and began targeting LCA's clients. LCA's owner told two third parties, one of whom was the Claimant’s new line manager and the other a client of LCA, that by doing this the Claimant was in breach of her contract of employment with LCA. In fact, there was no term of that contract (as the owner of LCA knew) which prohibited the claimant from soliciting business from LCA’s clients.
Read moreThe Model Anti-SLAPP Law: an overview
Following the Government's response to the SLAPP consultation in the summer, the UK Anti-SLAPP coalition (a working group that includes English PEN, the Foreign Policy Centre and Index on Censorship, "the Coalition") has this week published a model Anti-SLAPP law, which has been endorsed by a collection of free speech and anti-corruption organisations, journalists, editors and lawyers.
Read moreAll is not (necessarily) lost: Crypto crime recovery
With over 2 million people in the UK now holding and using cryptocurrency, and the Chancellor announcing that a government backed non-fungible token ("NFT") is to be issued by the Royal Mint this summer, the market for crypto-assets is expected to continue to grow in the coming months and years; so much so that legislation is planned to implement a new regulatory regime for the crypto market.
Read moreJudicial developments in recent treaty cases
A spate of recent cases concerning the application of double tax treaties has seen the courts and tribunals striving for common¬sense, policy-driven outcomes.
Read moreJudicial review: does the Court of Appeal’s decision in Murphy offer taxpayers a glimmer of hope?
Judicial review provides a constitutionally important judicial check on the exercise of statutory powers by public bodies such as HMRC. However, the wide margin of appreciation afforded to public bodies by the courts, coupled with recent reforms to the judicial review process, make it a remedy of last resort that can be difficult for taxpayers to pursue successfully. In overturning the High Court’s refusal of the taxpayers’ judicial review claim, the Court of Appeal in Murphy v HMRC confirmed that HMRC had breached their legitimate expectation as to the application of an extra-statutory concession. While Murphy is unlikely to be the harbinger of a wholesale rebalancing of the judicial review scales in the taxpayer’s favour, it is a welcome step in the right direction.
Read moreFTT prevents HMRC from having two bites of the cherry!
In Lady Henrietta Pearson v HMRC [2014] UKFTT 890 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) ('FTT') concluded that HMRC had "ignored" its previous decision by seeking to reduce the amount of a VAT refund which it had ordered HMRC make to Lady Henrietta Pearson ('the taxpayer').
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here