![[2024] UKUT 287 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Issue 2: the Consistency Issue: discussion and conclusions
Issue 2: the Consistency Issue: discussion and conclusions
The parties approached Issue 2 on the basis that it only arose if DSG failed on Issue 1, since success on Issue 1 would in any event lead to the setting aside of the FTT’s finding that the EMV Data was personal data for the purposes of the alleged DPP7 contravention. Whilst we agree that, technically, this is the case, we have decided to address Issue 2 briefly, as it may assist the FTT on remission.
- Heading
- THE HON. MRS JUSTICE HEATHER WILLIAMS DBE
- Decision date: 23 September 2024
- A summary of the relevant background
- The ICO’s MPN
- The FTT’s decision
- Personal data
- The contravention of DPP7
- Seriousness of the contravention
- Substantial damage and distress and knowledge
- The substituted MPN
- The issues on this appeal
- The grant of permission to appeal
- The legal framework
- Scope of grants of permission
- Relevant provisions of the DPA 1998
- Relevant case law and guidance on the meaning of “personal data”
- Security of processing
- Relevant principle of judicial decision-making
- Issue 1: the EMV Data Issue: the parties’ submissions
- The respondent’s submissions
- Issue 1: the EMV Data Issue: discussion and conclusions
- The statutory provisions
- The case law
- The FTT’s reasoning and the FTT’s error
- Issue 2: the Consistency Issue: the parties’ submissions
- The respondent’s submissions
- Issue 2: the Consistency Issue: discussion and conclusions
- Scope of the grant of permission
- The FTT’s errors
- Issue 3: the Procedural Fairness Issue
- Issue 4: the Implications Issue: the parties’ submissions
- The respondent’s submissions
- Issue 4: the Implications Issue: discussion and conclusions
- Issue 5: the Seriousness Issue: the parties’ submissions
- The respondent’s submissions
- Issue 5: the Seriousness Issue: discussion and conclusions
- Conclusions