KB 2023 004108 - [2025] EWHC 1824 (KB)
Fecha: 22-Jul-2025
Heading
Approved Judgment

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Before :
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE JENNIFER EADY DBE
Between:
(1) YESIM KUL
(2) ROHAT MAHIR (BY LITIGATION FRIEND MAHMUT MAHIR)
(3) MAHMUT MAHIR
Claimants
-and-
DWF LAW LLP
Defendant
Richard Hanstock (instructed by Ersan & Co Solicitors) for the Claimants
Robin Hopkins (instructed by Clyde & Co LLP) for the Defendant
Hearing date: 4 and 5 June 2025
Approved Judgment
This judgment was handed down remotely at 10.00am on 22th July 2025 by circulation to the parties or their representatives by e-mail and by release to the National Archives.
Contents Para No.
Introduction 1-2
Background 3-31
Ersan road traffic accident personal injury claims before the County Court
JS1 and the initial data protection objections
The debarring application and appeal
Complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office
Resumption of the county court proceedings and the Ersan undertaking
The claims before me and the parties’ submissions 37-46
UK General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Act 2018
Lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner
Data minimisation, storage limitation, integrity and confidentiality
What is “necessary” and the proportionality assessment
Analysis and conclusions 76-111
The factual basis for the claims: my findings
Whether the processing was lawful - purpose
Data minimisation, storage limitation, integrity and confidentiality
Disposal 112-113
Mrs Justice Jennifer Eady DBE:
Introduction
- Heading
- Introduction
- Background
- Ersan road traffic accident personal injury claims before the County Court
- JS1 and the initial data protection objections
- The debarring application and appeal
- Complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office
- Resumption of the county court proceedings and the Ersan undertaking
- The current proceedings
- The evidence
- The claims before me and the parties’ submissions
- The defence
- The legal framework
- Lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner
- Purpose limitation
- Data minimisation, storage limitation, integrity and confidentiality
- What is “necessary” and the proportionality assessment
- Pleadings
- Analysis and conclusions
- The factual basis for the claims: my findings
- Whether the processing was lawful - purpose
- Necessity and proportionality
- Fairness and transparency
- Purpose limitation
- Data minimisation, storage limitation, integrity and confidentiality
- Abuse of process
- Conclusions