GN Law - Our People News and TV

R (on the application of TD) -v- (1) Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis (2) Secretary of State for the Home Department (2013)

Our People - Andrew Guile
2 August, 2013

This is yet another case that continues a worrying trend of the courts allowing the police to keep data.

The Case

The man in question had been accused of rape and his DNA, photo etc all taken. He was interviewed, denied any wrongdoing and was released without any charges. His data, etc were destroyed but the police retained the CRIS (Computer Report Information System) that detailed the allegations.

The court appears to have acknowledged that the allegations against the man were unfounded. The arrest and interview were, at the time of the hearing, nine years old.

The Issues

The basic position is that the retention of such data is an interference with the man’s Article 8 rights under the ECHR (the right to private and family life). But, the police can keep the data if it’s necessary for policing. There is always a balance to be struck here and the court found against the applicant and for the police.

The court noted that the data could be important if the lady in question made other unfounded allegations in the future or if the man was similarly accused. Of significant importance was the fact that the data was not made public and was only accessible by authorised personnel investigating crime. The police had already demonstrated that they would carefully control the use of the data by refusing to release it to a potential employer.

The court did criticise the Metropolitan Police’s data retention policy though as it has no procedure of reviewing data retention. There should be a periodic review of whether or not continued retention is justified.

Summary

Few cases of this type (that are reported) see an applicant being successful. Courts do allow the police significant leeway in what data they can retain.

If you would like advice on issues relating to complaints against the police, please do not hesitate to contact a member of our Actions Against Police Team or get in touch on 020 8492 2290.

Related Articles

Code 1.7A states the Appropriate Adult’s role is to safeguard the rights and welfare of juveniles and vulnerable people. If you have been interviewed without an Appropriate Adult, and without a solicitor, then it may be the police have breached their statutory duty.
Our People - Luke Cowles
Andrew Guile advises clients upon all aspects of bringing compensation claims against the police.
Our People - Andrew Guile
The Code of Practice for Victims of Crime sets out the services and the minimum standard for these services, that must be provided to victims of crime by organisations in England and Wales.
Our People - Cerise White
The Islington Support Payment Scheme is now live for those who suffered non-recent abuse at a care home under the authority of Islington Council.
Our People - Luke Cowles
This article will explore a victim’s rights when disagreeing with a decision made by the police or Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) not to prosecute a suspect. The police have investigatory powers and present their evidence to the CPS. The CPS are a body that determines whether there is a suitable amount of evidence to persuade a court that a person...
Our People - GN
Cerise White takes a look at the important decision of Mr Justice Hayden in the case of SS v LB Richmond on Thames and SWL CCG where an application to vaccinate an incapacitated adult against COVID-19 was refused.
Our People - Cerise White

Send a message

We will only use the information you enter in this form to contact you about your enquiry and will not share it with anyone else. Please read our Privacy Notice.

Please note that we are not accepting any new housing work at this time.