The UK convenience store giant ‘Southern Co-op’ is facing the possibility of regulatory intervention and legal challenge following a complaint made by UK civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch (BBW) regarding the use of surveillance cameras in 35 Southern Co-op stores. Images of customers that a member of staff ‘reasonably expects’ to be committing ‘crime or disorder’ are captured and transformed into biometric data. The data of those ‘identified as an offender’ is then stored and checked against the database of facial recognition technology provider, ‘Facewatch.’
Continue Reading The Southern Co-op – Is the Use of ‘Spy’ Cameras Breaching UK Data Protection Laws?
Two More Nails in the Coffin for Opportunistic Data Breach Claims
Following on from a string of cases in 2021 concerning minor data breaches (see our earlier article here), two further cases in Q1 of 2022 have continued the trend of High Court scepticism. Such compensation claims, usually involving multiple causes of action, often find themselves trimmed down and sent to the County Court, if
Double Trouble: Why Organisations Need to Consider the Legal Consequences of Ransomware and DDoS Attacks
Ransomware and DDoS attacks are costly to organisations that fall victim in terms of reputational damage, picking up the pieces as well as potential enforcement from the ICO and compensation claims by data subjects.
Continue Reading Double Trouble: Why Organisations Need to Consider the Legal Consequences of Ransomware and DDoS Attacks
Narrowing the Scope of Data Breach Claims? – Warren v DSG Retail Ltd
Over the past few years, there has been an increasing number of claims against businesses and public bodies for distress caused by data breaches. The pattern is, by now, a familiar one. A claimant will make a claim for breach of data protection legislation, seeking damages at a relatively low value for the distress and anxiety they say has been caused by the data breach. This claim will be accompanied by claims for one or more of: misuse of private information, breach of confidence and negligence. Added on to the damages claimed will be the legal costs of the claimant’s lawyers, together with the after-the-event (“ATE”) insurance premium for the policy the claimant will have procured to bring a privacy claim. As a result, the defendant is faced with a difficult decision – pay over the odds for a claim where the claimant has suffered no financial loss, or fight litigation with the risk of mounting costs on both sides if the decision goes against them.
Following a cyber-attack in 2017 and 2018, this is the situation that faced DSG Retail Limited (“DSG”), and which has led to an important judgment for these data breach claims, Warren v DSG Retail Ltd [2021] EWHC 2168 (QB).
Continue Reading Narrowing the Scope of Data Breach Claims? – Warren v DSG Retail Ltd
HO HO HOLD UP! Federal Government Warns Consumers of Holiday Cyber Threats (and Companies Should Take Note Too)
‘Tis the season.
Cybercrimes always increase during the holidays, but this year could reach new threat levels. With COVID-19 (and as confirmed by the decreased Black Friday foot traffic versus the increased Cyber Monday sales), Americans are expected to do most of their holiday shopping online this year. In response to this development, the Cybersecurity
Ups & Downs in Healthcare Data Breach Litigation—Federal Court Tosses Damages Class, but Leaves Case on Life Support by Certifying Injunctive Class
As CPW has covered, healthcare data breaches are on the rise (and are likely to continue to do so in light of the rise in telehealth in 2020). Despite the recent proliferation of data breach litigation, case law hasn’t caught up—you can count on your hands the number of times any court, state or
District Court Decides Capital One Forensic Report Dispute
On June 25, 2020, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia upheld a Magistrate Judge’s order, compelling Capital One to produce the Mandiant Report at issue in the matter of In Re: Capital One Consumer Data Security Breach Litigation (See MDL No.1:19md2915).
The decision put to rest the month-long dispute over
Capital One Objects to Magistrate Judge’s Ruling Its Forensic Report Discoverable: Here are the Practical Takeaways
As has been widely reported, a magistrate judge in the Eastern District of Virginia recently ordered Capital One to produce a forensic report prepared by the cybersecurity firm Mandiant, holding that the report was not protected as attorney work product despite having been prepared at the direction of outside counsel. On June 9, 2020, Capital
Virgin Media suffers Data Security Breach
Virgin Media is reportedly one of the latest UK companies to suffer a data security breach. On 5 March 2020, it published a statement on its website explaining that one of its databases had been accessed without Virgin Media’s authorisation, due to a configuration issue. It is reported that the database had been left unsecured since April 2019 and that it contained information about (approximately) 900,000 existing and potential customers. Virgin Media states that the compromised information was mostly limited to contact and product data and importantly, did not contain financial information or passwords.
The statement sets out a number of frequently asked questions, with easy to understand responses. The ICO and affected data subjects have been notified and the statement provides customers with information about possible scams and phishing attacks aimed at helping them to better protect themselves and be aware of the risks in a heightened risk environment, in light of the incident.
Continue Reading Virgin Media suffers Data Security Breach
ICO Issues Fine Against National Retailer for Security Failings
An unhappy new year for Currys PC World and Dixons Travel stores, as the ICO has issued owners DSG Retail Limited with a Monetary Penalty Notice of £500,000 for serious security failings involving Point of Sale (“POS”) terminals in stores. Although the incident was investigated and addressed under the pre-GDPR legislation, the fine represents the maximum available to the Commissioner, under the Data Protection Act 1998, who in her findings observed that “but for the statutory limitation on the amount, it would have been reasonable and proportionate to impose a higher penalty”. This decision is important for retailers, particularly on payment information. It is also helpful to understand the factors involved in the breach of security, and offers some insight as to the ICO’s assessment of “appropriate technical and organisational measures” which of course remain crucial requirements for the security of personal data under the GDPR.
Continue Reading ICO Issues Fine Against National Retailer for Security Failings