New EU data laws shake up privacy regulation

The European Commission originally put forward its EU Data Protection Reform in January 2012 to make Europe fit for the digital age (IP/12/46), but in December 2015, an agreement was found with the European Parliament.

More than 90 per cent of Europeans say they want the same data protection rights across the EU, regardless of where their data is processed, and this will soon be a reality. As a result, businesses will need to be aware of how to comply. 

The reform consists of two policies:

• The General Data Protection Regulation will enable people to better control their personal data. At the same time, modernised and unified rules will allow businesses to make the most of the opportunities of the Digital Single Market by cutting red tape and benefiting from reinforced consumer trust
• The Data Protection Directive for the police and criminal justice sector will ensure that the data of victims, witnesses, and suspects of crimes are duly protected in the context of a criminal investigation or a law enforcement action. At the same time, more harmonised laws will also facilitate cross-border co-operation of police or prosecutors to combat crime and terrorism more effectively across Europe

It is believed that the reform will allow people to regain control of their personal data, which may create a burden for some businesses. 

According to a recent Eurobarometer survey, 67 per cent of Europeans are concerned about not having complete control over the information they provide online, while 70 per cent worry about the potential use that companies may make of the information disclosed. The data protection reform will strengthen the right to data protection, which is a fundamental right in the EU and allows users to have trust when they give their personal data.

The new rules address these concerns by strengthening the existing rights and empowering individuals with more control over their personal data. These include:

• easier access to your own data: individuals will have more information on how their data is processed and this information should be available in a clear and understandable way
• a right to data portability: it will be easier to transfer your personal data between service providers
• a clarified “right to be forgotten”: when you no longer want your data to be processed, and provided that there are no legitimate grounds for retaining it, the data will be deleted
• the right to know when your data has been hacked. For example, companies and organisations must notify the national supervisory authority of serious data breaches as soon as possible so that users can take appropriate measures

The Commission will work closely with Member State data protection authorities to ensure a uniform application of the new rules and during the two-year transition phase from 2016 to 2018, the Commission will inform citizens about their rights as well as update companies about their obligations.

Link: Reform of the data protection legal framework in the EU

Family courts fail young mothers

At least one in four women will return to the family court, having previously lost a child through a court order, and the chances of having a child removed increase to at least one in three for women who were teenagers at the birth of their first child. 

A team of researchers, funded by the Nuffield Foundation and led by Professor Karen Broadhurst from Lancaster University, have updated initial findings that were first presented last year confirming that a ‘hidden population’ of mothers are caught up in a cycle of family court proceedings with children being removed from women’s care.

This research (outlined in ‘Number of newborn babies taken into care more than doubles in five years’, 14/12/15) identifies for the first time the relationship between young motherhood and the risk of court-ordered removal of children and statistics concerning removal at birth. The paper covering this research, titled ‘Connecting events in time to identify a hidden population: Birth mothers and their children in recurrent care proceedings in England’ is published in the British Journal of Social Work.

The investigators are based at Lancaster University, Brunel University in London and the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust. Further detailed case file review work is ongoing and the study will conclude in June 2016.  

The study uses electronic records held by the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) and findings are based on care applications made by local authorities in England over a period from 2007 to 2014. The research team found more than 13,000 infants were subject to legal proceedings at or close to birth (within 31 days) for the period.

The research team warn that without further evaluation and a far wider roll-out of preventative programmes, it is highly probable that local authorities and family courts will continue to see a sizeable population of mothers reappear through the family courts. The team welcome initiatives including an intensive support pathway as part of the National Family Court and the Pause Initiative, but say more is needed to ensure these initiatives are established and sustained in mainstream practice.

Link: Lancaster University

Personal injury claims limit rise not welcomed by Law Society

Independent professional body, the Law Society, has criticised a Government plan to raise the small claims limit for personal injury claims to £5,000 and stop compensation payments for so-called ‘minor’ soft tissue injuries.

Responding to the proposals, Law Society President Jonathan Smithers said:

“The Law Society is gravely concerned that these proposals will completely undermine the right of ordinary citizens to receive full and proper compensation from those that have injured them through negligence. These proposals will stop people obtaining legal advice for all personal injury claims below £5,000 and stop people claiming for often debilitating injuries arising from road traffic accidents if these injuries are considered minor.

“This is a fivefold increase in the present level of cases currently within the small claims procedure, benefiting those who have negligently harmed people and will result in more people trying to work their way through a complex court system without any legal advice. People recovering from their injuries will have to bring claims as litigants in person and this can be very unfair because those defending the claims can often afford to pay for legal advice. This therefore undermines ordinary people’s ability to access justice. Especially if defendants simply deny liability, forcing people to fight through the courts without legal help.

“Personal injury claims, even lower value claims, can include serious injuries arising from the fault of an employer or other road traffic accidents where legal rights can be very complex and the injuries caused debilitating. A new limit of £5,000 will mean personal injuries including facial scarring would be considered as ‘small claims’. This is totally unacceptable.

“These proposals are not, as stated, about stopping fraudulent claims. Fraudulent claims are clearly repellent but they should be dealt with by targeting the fraudsters and not the vast majority of honest claimants who have been injured and bring genuine claims.”

The Law Society argues that the small claims procedure is an essential part of the civil justice system that enables consumers and businesses to pursue low value claims without the risk of a large bill for legal costs if they lose. It states that a substantial increase to the current limit will deny many thousands of people the right to seek the advice of and representation by a solicitor.

Link: The Law Society