[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decisions >> Jackson v Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2014] EWHC 3954 (QB) (26 November 2014) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2014/3954.html Cite as: [2014] EWHC 3954 (QB) |
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
Sitting as a High Court Judge
____________________
JAMES JACKSON |
Claimant |
|
- and - |
||
HAMPSHIRE HOSPITALS NHS FOUNDATION TRUST |
Defendant |
____________________
Kate Wilson (instructed by Weightmans LLP) for the Defendant
Hearing date: 29 October 2014
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Sir David Eady :
"A. That her colleague 'found his manner threatening' and/or;
B. That her colleague 'felt threatened by his behaviour' and/or;
C. That the Claimant was 'threatening'."
"It is submitted that … the innuendo meaning should be considered, as an employee of the Defendant stating to a third party that their colleague: 'found his manner threatening' and/or 'felt threatened by his behaviour' and/or his behaviour 'was threatening' infers that the Claimant was/had harassed/ victimised/intimidated her colleague Ms Wines."
"The notion that certain proceedings are simply not worth the court time and costs which they entail is very much a product of the new climate engendered by the Civil Procedure Rules."
"I am completely baffled by this. Solicitors constantly write letters which necessarily are defamatory of the opposing party. It is practically impossible in litigation to write a letter is which not defamatory of the opposing party."
These words provide, says Ms Wilson, "a salutary reminder of the reality of a situation like this where a solicitor hears something negative about a client".
"The fourth principle is not to be regarded as being contravened by reason of any inaccuracy in personal data which accurately record information obtained by the data controller from the data subject or a third party in a case where –
(a) having regard to the purpose or purposes for which the data were obtained and further processed, the data controller has taken reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of the data, and
(b) if the data subject has notified the data controller of the data subject's view that the data are inaccurate, the data indicate that fact."
She submits that there is thus no contravention of the relevant principle.