Easylife Limited v The Information Commissioner
Neutral citation number: [2023] UKFTT 00287 (GRC) Case Reference: EA/2022/0336/FP First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Information Rights Considered without a hearing On: 15 March 2023 Decision given on: 15 March 2023 Before TRIBUNAL JUDGE NEVILLE Between easylife limited Appellant and the information commissioner Respondent CONSENT ORDER UPON the Information Commissioner having issued a Monetary Penalty Notice to the Appellant on...
2 min de lecture · 316 mots
Neutral citation number: [2023] UKFTT 00287 (GRC) Case Reference: EA/2022/0336/FP First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Information Rights Considered without a hearing On: 15 March 2023 Decision given on: 15 March 2023 Before TRIBUNAL JUDGE NEVILLE Between easylife limited Appellant and the information commissioner Respondent CONSENT ORDER UPON the Information Commissioner having issued a Monetary Penalty Notice to the Appellant on 4 October 2022 AND UPON the Information Commissioner having found in the Monetary Penalty Notice that the Appellant processed personal data in contravention of Article 5(1)(a) of the General Data Protection Regulations 2016/679 between 1 August 2019 and 19 August 2020 and should in consequence be required to pay a monetary penalty AND UPON the Appellant having appealed to the Tribunal against the Monetary Penalty Notice pursuant to section 162 of the Data Protection Act 2018 on 31 October 2022 AND UPON the Appellant having permanently ceased the processing of personal data identified at paragraphs 29-30 in the Monetary Penalty Notice AND UPON the Information Commissioner agreeing that the amount of the monetary penalty specified in the Monetary Penalty Notice should be £250,000 IT IS ORDERED BY CONSENT: 1. In place of the Monetary Penalty Notice issued by the Commissioner, the Tribunal substitutes a Monetary Penalty Notice in identical terms, save that the amount of the monetary penalty shall be £250,000. 2. Otherwise, the Appellant’s appeal is dismissed. 3. There shall be no order as to costs. [signed on the original on behalf of the parties] I consider it appropriate to make the above consent order pursuant to r.37 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009. The compromise has been freely entered into by represented parties and is in accordance with the overriding objective. SignedDate: Judge Neville15 March 2023
Sources officielles : consulter la page source
Open Justice Licence (The National Archives).
Articles similaires
A propos de cette decision
Décisions similaires
Royaume-Uni
First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) – Information Rights
Beacon Counselling Trust v The Information Commissioner & Anor
Introduction to the Appeal 1. On 23 May 2024, the Appellant submitted a request (“the Request”) to the Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (“the Trust”) for copies of correspondence making reference to the Appellant, which had been sent to or from a named person at the Trust from 1 February 2023 to the date of the Request. 2....
Royaume-Uni
High Court (Chancery Division)
Kalaivani Jaipal Kirishani v George Major
Sir Anthony Mann : Introduction 1. This is an appeal from an order of HHJ Gerald sitting in the County Court at Central London dated 23rd December 2024 in which he dismissed two of three claims made by Ms Kirishana as claimant against her former cohabitee Mr Major. The claims were for a contribution to household and other domestic expenses,...
Royaume-Uni
High Court (Insolvency and Companies List)
Joanna Rich v JDDR Capital Limited
ICC JUDGE AGNELLO KC: Introduction 1. This is the judgment in relation to an application to set aside a statutory demand against Mrs Joanna Rich (Mrs Rich) and a petition against Mr Clive Rich (Mr Rich) relating to the same debt claimed under a personal guarantee provided by them in relation to a loan granted to LawBit Limited (Lawbit). Mr...