Search

How can we help?

Icon

DSAR: Do I need to provide names if requested?

Under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), in both the EU and UK versions, employees have the right to request access to their personal data from their employer called a Data Subject Access Request (DSAR).

The employee is entitled to be given a copy of their personal data together with certain information which includes information as to ‘the recipients or categories of recipients to whom data has been or will be disclosed’.

Many employers when responding to such requests prefer to provide the ‘categories of recipients’ rather than specific names and, as such, may refer to groups such as ‘business contacts’ or ‘HR’.

However, this point has come up recently in the EU case of RW v. Osterreichische Post (OP)

The facts on this DSAR case

The data subject in this case made a data access request to OP. The company OP had provided general descriptions of the recipients of the data (e.g. “business customers for marketing purposes”) but the data subject did not believe this was good enough and asked OP to specifically identify the third parties that his personal data had been shared with.

The Advocate General’s opinion

The Advocate General usually gives an opinion prior to the European Court of Justice handing down its own judgment. The Judgment does typically follow the opinion but it does not have to.

In the Advocate General’s opinion, the EU GDPR requires an employer to provide information as to the specific recipients, if it is requested to do so by the employee. It recognised that the EU GDPR allows a choice between categories or specific recipients but said that this choice was for the employee to make, not the employer.

Many employers when responding to such requests prefer to provide the ‘categories of recipients’ rather than specific names and, as such, may refer to groups such as ‘business contacts’ or ‘HR’.

What this means for the UK GDPR?

Firstly, this is an opinion by the Advocate General and may not be followed by the European Court of Justice at all. Secondly, this is an EU case involving interpretation of EU law (the EU GDPR) and is not, therefore, binding on the UK. However, as the UK GDPR uses the same wording it is arguable that this case could have some impact on the way the UK GDPR is interpreted.

It is unclear how specific the requirement is in this specific case, but it could be argued from this case that if an employee requests the names of those in HR who have seen his data, rather than just accepting a ‘HR’ categorisation, then an employer may need to provide it. This makes compliance with such requests even more onerous for organisations.

It will be interesting to see how this point plays out in the UK, particularly given the government’s recent consultation on data protection (including access requests) which is aimed, in part, at reducing the burdens on organisations. For further support with your data subject access requests contact our employment solicitors.

About this article

Disclaimer
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 14 November 2017
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

When Can I Refuse To Mediate?

Anyone who has been involved in a legal dispute will have been told to consider engaging in some form of alternative dispute resolution, most often mediation, before the issue of proceedings.

art
  • 13 November 2017
  • Employment

Will Uber work in the area again?

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has today upheld the ET decision that when the Uber drivers were in the work area, available for work and with Uber app switched on, they were workers with rights to national minimum wage, sick pay and holiday pay.

art
  • 13 November 2017
  • Commercial Real Estate

Liability For Reduction In Value Of Neighbouring Properties Due To Japanese Knotweed

Japanese Knotweed is a fast-growing invasive species and is a significant problem because it can cause physical damage to buildings and land. It is expensive and time consuming to permanently remove. Clarkslegal was instructed on the sale of a development site which was delayed for over a year when the buyer found Japanese Knotweed on site and insisted that the seller remove it before completion.

art
  • 13 November 2017
  • Employment

Michael Sippitt comments on Uber losing UK legal appeal against drivers’ rights

Taxi-hailing firm Uber has lost its appeal on Friday (10 November) against a ruling that its drivers should be classed as workers rather than self-employed.

art
  • 10 November 2017
  • Privacy and Data Protection

Most organisations failing to inform users about use of their personal data

The ICO has led a global investigation of website privacy communications on behalf of the Global Privacy Enforcement Network (GPEN) and found many organisations’ data protection practices are lacking.

art
  • 10 November 2017
  • Employment

The importance of understanding the economic entity in a TUPE situation

For there to be a business transfer under TUPE there must be an ‘economic entity’ that retains its identity post-transfer.