Data Protection Claims and counterclaims

Legacy_user

The question of whether there should be counterclaim for misuse of personal data is raised almost every day. While it is relevant in some cases it won't be in others.

The Lloyd v Google case was supposedly a Class action on the basis of damages whereas the the Vidal-Hall case was for distress and anxiety, not financial damage. Tort was found though. Lloyd lost as he couldn't prove a Class nor a loss.

However if there was damage from a default CCJ, there is a strong argument there is loss, distress, anxiety and harassment. This would be underpinned by the moves by the Ministry of Justice to rewrite the CPR to avoid the harm of default CCJ's

So before anyone fires off a DPA counterclaim, it may be useful to read the two cases and quote them.

bargepole

The more relevant case, in my opinion, is that of Halliday -v- Creation Consumer Finance Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 333.

The finance company wrongly attributed a default to the consumer's account, and informed the credit reference agencies, resulting in the consumer's credit rating being damaged for no valid reason.

The Court of Appeal found that he had suffered loss and damage as a result, and ruled that £750 was an 'appropriate and sufficient' amount of compensation.

In the case of Mr C v CEL recently at High Wycombe County Court, the Judge took that case as a starting point, and found that CEL had not evidenced proper authority to operate, and had therefore breached the DPA by processing Mr C's data. However, they had not shared the data with third parties, so the damages awarded were restricted to £200.

beamerguy

IamEmanresu wrote: »

This would be underpinned by the moves by the Ministry of Justice to rewrite the CPR to avoid the harm of default CCJ's

Is this really happening ?
It's now 2 years ago that Mrs May said.....

Theresa May vows to investigate ‘abuse’ of CCJ system
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3786132/I-ll-end-credit-rating-scandal-pledges-PM-acts-Mail-exposes-rulings-ruined-lives.html

Or is it the case of government runs more slowly
than Fred Flintstone ?

System

And just as a reality check....but from another case, it pays to remember:

The cause of action will not accrue until actionable damage occurs

So there has to be damage and it has to be actionable (not de minimis) and it has to be proveable.