Why the Data Protection Act was once a 'paltry' remedy for celebrities
In short: For years, the Data Protection Act 1998 was a mere footnote in privacy law. Despite its potential, the legislation offered such insignificant damages that it failed to become a serious tool for those seeking to protect their personal information from the media.
Under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA), the protection of personal information was often relegated to a technicality. While the Act was intended to safeguard privacy, it was frequently overshadowed by other legal issues like breach of confidence and misuse of private information. In early high-profile cases involving figures such as Naomi Campbell and Michael and Catherine Zeta-Jones Douglas, the damages awarded under the DPA were assessed at only £50. Early litigation often saw these claims treated as minor footnotes in final judgments. This occurred even when data protection was specifically pleaded within the legal action.
This lack of impact was partly due to the Act's structure and the existence of a Regulator with broad enforcement powers. However, the primary obstacle was an in-built limitation on damages, which rendered the Act an 'ugly relation' in privacy law. For many litigants, the prospect of such minimal awards was not enough to justify the cost of legal action, leaving the Act in a moribund state for a long period. The presence of a Commissioner with both regulatory and enforcement powers also influenced this stagnation. This official could utilise various civil and criminal procedures to manage the regime.
The landscape began to shift fundamentally in the latter half of 2015. Key cases involving Paul Weller, Shobna Gulati, and the Vidal-Hall matter started to transform data protection into a significant celebrity privacy remedy. This evolution was further accelerated by the introduction of a new EU Data Protection Regulation, set to come into force in 2018. This new regime introduced much higher stakes, with potential fines for transgressions reaching between 2% and 4% of worldwide turnover or €100 million. The Supreme Court was tasked with resolving the pivotal Vidal-Hall case. This development helped elevate data protection from a technicality to a major privacy remedy.
Opens the Intellect+ feed with this card first. Swipe up for the next one.
Sources
- Summary by Intellect · source: Celebrities, the Media and the Personal Data Privacy Wars - Dr Robin Callender Smith
- Also: Celebrities, the Media and the Personal Data Privacy Wars
To cite this card, link to https://intellectplus.co.uk/app/ideas-celebrities-the-media-and-the-personal-data-privacy-wars-dr-.
How we source, check and correct cards: Editorial standards.
General information, not professional advice. Spotted an error? Flag the card or see corrections and complaints.
Intellect Plus is a visual educational discovery platform for exploring fascinating facts and ideas. Brain Food, Not Brain Rot. What is Intellect Plus?
