CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

- Colección
- Registrarse

ordenado por

Fecha de creación

28 relaciones, 26 Entidades

Seleccionar párrafo de destino3

● ● ●

Uwazi es desarrollado por
CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law
Colección
Acceder

Información
28relaciones

Privacy International v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs et al.

Case Law

Consejos de búsqueda

Buscar texto

Type something in the search box to get some results.

Tabla de Contenidos

Sin Tabla de Contenidos

Sin descripción de Tabla de Contenidos

Privacy International v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs et al.

Case Law

Country

United Kingdom

Country Location

Latitud: 52.32950805122076

Longitud: -1.4047851562500706

Country Location (vinculado Case Law): United Kingdom

Decision Date: 17 oct 2016

Case Status: In progress

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Motion Denied

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Judgment in Favor of Defendant
Law or Action Upheld

Keywords

Data Protection and Retention
Privacy
Surveillance

Case Number: [2016] UKIPTrib 15_110-CH

Case Summary: The U.K. Investigatory Powers Tribunal ruled that the obtaining by Security and Intelligence Agencies of Bulk Communications Data (BCD) from telecom operators was lawful under domestic law, namely Section 94 of the Telecommunications Act 1984, but that both the BCD and the Bulk Personal Datasets (BPD) regimes failed to comply with European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) principles until their existence was made public. The campaign group, Privacy International, claimed that the acquisition and use of bulk personal and communications data by MI5, MI6 and Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) infringed the right to private life under Article 8 ECHR. The Foreign Secretary, the Home Secretary and the three security services argued that the use of these powers was lawful and essential for the protection of national security. The Court reasoned that the obtaining of BPD and BCD under rules and arrangements that were not publicly accessible fell foul of the ECHR Article 8 requirement that such measures must be "in accordance with law" because the rules were not sufficiently foreseeable or accessible and were not subject to adequate oversight.

Case Significance: The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

Related Caselaw

Electronic Privacy Information Center v. Department of Justice Criminal Division
Google Spain, S.L. v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (Spanish Data Protection Agency)
In re Google Inc. Cookie Placement Consumer Privacy Litigation
Privacy International v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs et al.
Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner
Shi Tao v Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data

Source Name and URL: Columbia Global Freedom of Expression

Collection

CIPIT

Date Updated: 11 may 2024

Documentos primarios

Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign And Commonwealth Affairs & Ors (Rev 2) [2016] UKIPTrib 15_110-CH (17 October 2016).pdf
English
Descargar Ver

Sin referencias

References are parts of this document related with other documents and entities.

Country1
- Country1
No existe etiqueta3
- Ley2
- Analysis1
Related Case Law24
- Case Law24

Crear Referencia

Seleccionar tipo de relación

Original Law Cited
Related Translation
Related Media Source
Country
Related Law
Related Regulations
Related Secondary Law
Related Amendments
Related Draft Amendments
Related Case Law
Related Analysis

Consejos de búsqueda

Añadir entidades / documentos

Consejos de búsqueda

Notificaciones

Estás al día

La actividad nueva se mostrará aquí.