Please sign in with your existing account details.
Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.
Privacy statement - Terms and conditions
Forgotten your password?
You have exceeded the maximum number of login attempts for this email address and your account has been locked. An email has been sent to member of Browne Jacobson's web team and some one will be contacting you over the next two working days with details of how to change your password.
Are you sure you want to remove this item from you pinned content?
Following the ruling by the European Court of Justice on the invalidity of the Data Retention Directive as an unlawful intrusion of privacy, the UK government has proposed the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Bill to deal with the retention of telecommunications data. Under the Bill, telecommunications operators are required to retain communications data for a period of up to 12 months. The Bill gives the Secretary of State power to adopt a regulation that would set out certain procedural requirements regarding the retention of communications data. The Bill will replace the Data Retention Regulations 2009, amend the Regulation of Investigatory Power Act 2000 (RIPA) and clarify the circumstances in which a warrant for the disclosure of data can be issued. The declaration of invalidity clearly left a gap which the government wishes to plug, to enable the continued use by law enforcement agencies of such data. Can we take this as a hint that the controversial RIPA legislation may also be reviewed, in relation to the interception of communications, in addition to its retention?
In his 2018 Autumn Budget, the then Chancellor, Phillip Hammond, announced a significant change to the way liability for IR35 breaches will be dealt with for private sector companies from April 2020.
View blog
Last month, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) announced notice of its intention to fine (NOI) Marriott International, Inc. £99m for infringements of the GDPR.
On 16 July 2019 the Serious Fraud Office released details of the Deferred Prosecution Agreement reached with Sarclad Ltd in July 2016.
The Supreme Court in Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd has determined that where post-termination restrictive covenants (i.e. “non-compete” clauses) in employment contracts go further than reasonably necessary to protect an employer’s business interests, it can apply the ‘blue pencil test,’ severing the offending words and leaving the remaining enforceable clause in place.
Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.
Sign up