Search

How can we help?

Icon

“Systematic Failings” on Data Protection leads to a £15,000 fine

Following on from the case reported last month on data protection (”Failing to anonymise – the cost”), a nursing home in Northern Ireland has received a fine of £15,000 from the Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”), following the burglary of the home of one of its staff members.

During the burglary, an unencrypted work laptop was stolen. The laptop contained sensitive personal data, including medical information, on the nursing home’s 29 residents (including “do not resuscitate” orders) and personal data on the 46 members of staff.

The ICO’s subsequent investigation found the nursing home had no policies in place regarding the use of encryption, working from home and the storage of mobile devices. Data security training was also found to be lacking. In issuing the fine, the ICO said there had been “systematic failings” at the nursing home.

The fine was issued despite the nursing home referring themselves to the ICO, no complaints being made by any of the staff or residents’ families and no confirmation that the information had been further disseminated. In determining the level of the fine, the nursing home received some credit for having self-reported its breach to the ICO.

The ICO’s subsequent investigation found the nursing home had no policies in place regarding the use of encryption, working from home and the storage of mobile devices.

The amount of the fine reflected the size of the business, with the ICO stating that a bigger organisation experiencing a similarly serious breach should expect to receive a much larger fine. The case therefore acts as a timely reminder that all businesses must take their legal duties to look after personal data seriously and should ensure adequate policies, procedures and equipment are in place.  Simply having a work laptop password protected will not fulfil this duty.

For useful data protection factsheets, checklists and templates, please visit employmentbuddy.com 

For further advice on how to protect your business against data protection and privacy claims, please contact our employment lawyers on employment@clarkslegal.com 

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.

Author profile

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 09 July 2020
  • Employment

Use of Anonymous Witnesses in Disciplinary Hearings

In Tai Tarian Limited v Howell Wyn Christie, the Claimant (a carpenter) was dismissed by his employer following an anonymous complaint that he had made homophobic comments during a visit to a client’s property.

art
  • 08 July 2020
  • Commercial Real Estate

Tenant wins challenge against Landlord’s ‘conclusive’ service charge statement

In the recent case of Sara & Hossein Asset Holdings Ltd v Blacks Outdoor Retail Ltd EWHC 1263 (Ch), the High Court held that a tenant could challenge the service charge sums due under their lease,

art
  • 07 July 2020
  • Commercial Real Estate

Duval Case: Beware the Breach of Covenants

The Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Duval v 11-13 Randolph Crescent Ltd (Duval) is likely to have wide implications for landlords and tenants alike as it concerns the mutual enforceability of tenant covenants which is a standard provision in most modern leases.

art
  • 07 July 2020
  • Commercial Real Estate

Short-term letting? Check your Tenant Lease before you Breach

As the pandemic continues, those who own residential property may be looking to the future and considering whether there is money to be made by short-term lets (e.g. Airbnb)

art
  • 07 July 2020
  • Employment

Taking steps to avoid or reduce the impact of discrimination

When a discrimination claim is successful, as well as being able to order compensation for injury to feelings and financial losses, employment tribunals have the power to make a recommendation that, within a specified period,

art
  • 29 June 2020
  • Litigation and dispute resolution

Rail Franchise Litigation: Department for Transport did not Breach EU Law

The High Court has handed down judgment in the long-running rail franchise litigation brought against the Department for Transport by a number of railway operators including Virgin Trains,