UK data watchdog slaps Ministry of Justice with Enforcement Notice for breaking GDPR law

ICO threatens £17.5m fine over late processing of subject access requests

The UK's data watchdog has issued the Ministry of Justice with an Enforcement Order [PDF] after the government department broke data protection laws by failing to process thousands of subject access requests (SARs) without undue delay.

The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) said it was made aware of the backlog by the MoJ – the data controller – in January 2019 and spoke to the ministry over the course of the year, mulling potential action. Then the pandemic hit, leading to a change in the ICO's approach to regulatory action, and it paused the probe.

By October 2020, the ICO asked for an update on the number of outstanding SARs, but the MoJ said it too was struggling under the COVID-19 outbreak and had sought to prioritise requests that were "urgent" due to legal proceedings like immigration hearings or police investigations.

Between March and mid-April last year, the MoJ told the ICO it had 5,956 SARs that it had only partially responded to, including 372 that were made in 2018. In a further update in May 2021, the number of SARs only partially responded to had climbed to 6,398. The MoJ informed the ICO that full service for SARs would resume in October notwithstanding any further unforeseen restrictions.

The number of overdue SARs had risen yet again by August to 7,752, with 25 requests that received no response and 7,728 which received a partial response. The MoJ told the ICO that 960 SARs considered "out of time" prior to the pandemic would be responded to in full by the close of May this year.

The MoJ told the ICO, as quoted in the Enforcement Notice, that there were other routes for people to find out information held on them, and of course "they could submit a further SAR after the pandemic passed."

Despite the backlog, the MoJ told the data regulator it received 34 complaints from folk that had requested data held on them but only got a partial or no response.

The MoJ told the ICO it was reliant on the provision of manual and electronic information but operational capacity was limited by COVID-19 restrictions, something the ICO acknowledged, saying the MoJ had tried to comply with its statutory duties with regard to SARs.

"However," the ICO said in its Enforcement Notice, "the substantial number of subject access requests which remain outstanding and which are out of time for compliance is a cause of significant concern for the Commissioner."

"These concerns demonstrate that the controller is currently failing to adhere to its obligations in respect of the information rights of the data subjects for whom it processes data. Previous meetings and correspondence between the controller and Commissioner have proven largely ineffective in reducing the number of outstanding subject access requests."

As such, the MoJ "contravened" Chapter 3, Article 15 of the EU and UK GDPR, and section 45 of the Data Protection Act because it failed to inform the relevant data subjects "without undue delay" whether their personal data was being processed by the MoJ or on behalf of the MoJ and if so, to provide access to it in an intelligible form.

The ICO determined the shortfall in responses to SARs was "likely" to cause "damage or distress" to individuals trying to ascertain what information is held on them and were "unable to effectively exercise the various other rights statutorily afforded to a data subject."

The Enforcement Notice was considered to be a "proportionate regulatory step to bring the controller into compliance," it added.

The MoJ should now take steps to comply with the legislation, devise a recovery plan and better inform people of any delays to processing SARs, the ICO said. Failure to comply with the Notice may result in a penalty notice of up to £17.5m or 4 per cent of turnover, "whichever is higher."

The MoJ has 28 days from dispatch of the Enforcement Notice – yesterday – to lodge an appeal.

A spokesperson for the MoJ sent us a statement: "We take our responsibilities seriously and have set out an action plan to clear the backlog."

Neil Brown, veteran tech lawyer and boss of, told us the ICO was sympathetic to the challenges posed by the pandemic. However, he added: "It has clearly taken a dim view of the MoJ's large scale non-compliance. I suspect its assertion that people could always 'submit a further SAR after the pandemic passed' is not the approach the ICO would expect."

"The right of access to personal data undergoing processing is an important right. It's the only tool available to data subjects to check up on what an organisation is doing with their data, and to verify that what they have said in a privacy notice is correct," he said.

"The Enforcement Notice is a legally binding obligation to do better," Brown added. "Whether the MoJ should have needed a reminder to comply with the law is perhaps a different matter." ®

Similar topics

Other stories you might like

  • DuckDuckGo tries to explain why its browsers won't block Microsoft ad trackers
    Meanwhile, Tails 5.0 users told to stop what they're doing over Firefox flaw

    DuckDuckGo promises privacy to users of its Android, iOS browsers, and macOS browsers – yet it allows certain data to flow from third-party websites to Microsoft-owned services.

    Security researcher Zach Edwards recently conducted an audit of DuckDuckGo's mobile browsers and found that, contrary to expectations, they do not block Meta's Workplace domain, for example, from sending information to Microsoft's Bing and LinkedIn domains. Specifically, DuckDuckGo's software didn't stop Microsoft's trackers on the Workplace page from blabbing information about the user to Bing and LinkedIn for tailored advertising purposes. Other trackers, such as Google's, are blocked.

    "I tested the DuckDuckGo so-called private browser for both iOS and Android, yet neither version blocked data transfers to Microsoft's Linkedin + Bing ads while viewing Facebook's workplace[.]com homepage," Edwards explained in a Twitter thread.

    Continue reading
  • Despite 'key' partnership with AWS, Meta taps up Microsoft Azure for AI work
    Someone got Zuck'd

    Meta’s AI business unit set up shop in Microsoft Azure this week and announced a strategic partnership it says will advance PyTorch development on the public cloud.

    The deal [PDF] will see Mark Zuckerberg’s umbrella company deploy machine-learning workloads on thousands of Nvidia GPUs running in Azure. While a win for Microsoft, the partnership calls in to question just how strong Meta’s commitment to Amazon Web Services (AWS) really is.

    Back in those long-gone days of December, Meta named AWS as its “key long-term strategic cloud provider." As part of that, Meta promised that if it bought any companies that used AWS, it would continue to support their use of Amazon's cloud, rather than force them off into its own private datacenters. The pact also included a vow to expand Meta’s consumption of Amazon’s cloud-based compute, storage, database, and security services.

    Continue reading
  • Atos pushes out HPC cloud services based on Nimbix tech
    Moore's Law got you down? Throw everything at the problem! Quantum, AI, cloud...

    IT services biz Atos has introduced a suite of cloud-based high-performance computing (HPC) services, based around technology gained from its purchase of cloud provider Nimbix last year.

    The Nimbix Supercomputing Suite is described by Atos as a set of flexible and secure HPC solutions available as a service. It includes access to HPC, AI, and quantum computing resources, according to the services company.

    In addition to the existing Nimbix HPC products, the updated portfolio includes a new federated supercomputing-as-a-service platform and a dedicated bare-metal service based on Atos BullSequana supercomputer hardware.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022