The claimant doctor had sought assistance from the defendant, and having been refused it had sought disclosure of its records about him. He had been refused access under the 1998 Act, and now sought access under the Civil Procedure Rules.
Held: Though his claim still was for wrongful processing under the 1998 Act, that claim had to be pursued under CPR, which in turn included an obligation to provide disclosure of documents. His failure under section 7 did not stop an application under the Rules. The schemes had different purposes, and different documents were protected.
Judges:
Laddie J
Citations:
Times 25-Nov-2004, [2004] EWHC 2509 (Ch), [2005] 1 WLR 750, [2005] FSR 28, [2005] 1 All ER 87
Links:
Statutes:
Civil Procedure Rules, Data Protection Act 1998 7
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Johnson v Medical Defence Union Ltd ChD 20-Feb-2004
. .
Cited by:
Cited – Smith v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc ChD 23-Feb-2005
The respondent declined to produce information held about the claimant saying that it was not held within a filing system so as to bring it within the Act.
Held: ‘the legislature has taken a policy decision not to bring unstructured files . .
See Also – Johnson v The Medical Defence Union Ltd ChD 3-Mar-2006
The claimant sought disclosure under the 1998 Act by the defendant of records held by them. The respondent said that the information they held did not amount to data under the Act.
Held: The information was contained in different formats, on . .
See Also – Johnson v The Medical Defence Union CA 28-Mar-2007
The claimant asserted that the 1998 Act created rights between the parties that are in substance though not in form of a contractual nature; and rights to compensation for infringement of those primary rights of a nature that did not previously . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Information, Civil Procedure Rules
Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.219863