Data Protection and the ability to pass customer information to trading partners 

The Court of Appeal has given a useful judgment on the ability of one business to pass personal information about its customers to another.

The Data Protection Act 1998 prohibits data controllers from processing data (which includes transferring it to someone else) unless that processing meets one of the conditions contained in Schedule 2 of the Act. Schedule 2 contains such conditions as:

* the individual having given consent to the processing, and

* the processing being necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests of the data controller or the recipient, provided that the processing does not cause unwarranted prejudice to the individual’s interests.

In the case, Grow With Us Ltd v Green Thumb (UK) Ltd, 27 July 2006, Lord Justice Buxton said that it may very well be in a franchisor’s legitimate interests to receive information about its franchisee’s customers, for example to enable the franchisor to monitor customer turnover and provide assistance to the franchisee, and for accounting. He could not see that the disclosure of name and address information would cause unwarranted harm to customers’ interests. The Court found that the franchisee could not hide behind the Data Protection Act to refuse to fulfil a contractual obligation to provide the franchisor with customer information.

This part of the decision is obiter (not binding), but it is persuasive, and may apply not just in the context of the franchisor/franchisee relationship. It could also be applied, for example, to allow the transfer of customer information in a joint venture situation, but any such transfer would have to be structured carefully to ensure data protection compliance.

news

 

Bribery Act - an overview

Improvements for Employers, 17 01 2011

Employment law changes for 2011, 17 01 2011

Dismissal for promotion of spiritualism not belief discrimination, 17 01 2011

iLaw acting on largest case of 2011

Equality Act 2010, 15.10.2010

TUPE consultation failure case, 15.10.10

Garden leave case, 15.10.10

Minimum wage increases, 15.10.2010

UK tops false sick day league

Employment Tribunal claims rise

Smoking dismissal can be unfair

Redundancy Payment age cap ruled lawful

World Cup Employment Law Briefing, 25 05 2010

Stephen Eckett speaking at Get2Business09

Lawyer Awards, 07.05.09

TUPE hits law firm 03.04.09

Change proposed to redundancy pay 03.04.09

Employment claims rise, 03.04.09

Changes to statutory entitlements, 03.04.09

Statutory employment dispute procedures abolished, 03.04.09

Reseller trade mark use, 18.12.08

FT Innovative Lawyers

FT Innovative Lawyers Awards, 11.08.08

Without Prejudice in Employment, 21.04.08

Key redundancy issues, 21.04.08

Indirect and consequential loss exclusions, 13.03.08

iLaw featured in The Lawyer, 12.11.07

New Companies Act requires details on websites and e-mails, 16.01.07

European Court decision on freezer cabinet exclusivity, 13.10.06

iLaw featured in Lawyer article on boutique firms, 05.10.06

Google victory in US, 04.10.06

Online gaming banned in US, 04.10.06

The application of TUPE in outsourcing deals, 25.09.06

Copyright ruling against Google news links in Belgium, 19.09.06

Competition law - Yamaha forced to change anti-internet distribution policy, 18.09.06

Data protection, passage of customer information between businesses, 15.09.06

Ownership of database rights between agent and principal, 15.09.06

Data protection, binding corporate rules, 15.09.06

Article on legal issues with blogging, 13.09.06

DMH, Osborne Clarke lawyers set up IP/IT firm, 14.08.06