Follow us

The Information Commissioner’s Office in the UK (the “ICO”) last week published, for consultation, draft statutory guidance setting out how it will regulate and enforce data protection legislation in the UK. The consultation sets out all of the ICO’s key powers (including information notices, assessment notices, enforcement notices and penalty notices).

The consultation briefly discusses the treatment of privileged material. Perhaps most interestingly for organisations, it also sets out for the first time the ICO’s approach to how it calculates fines under the GDPR, giving organisations a better sense of the level of fine to which they could be subject for GDPR non-compliance.

This consultation will be of interest to banks and financial institutions, already subject to attention from the financial services regulators in this space, who may find themselves facing not only parallel inquiries and information requirements, but separate sanctions. The consultation does not explicitly discuss the possibility of “double jeopardy”, although it stresses that the proportionality of any action and its economic impact will be relevant considerations in assessing penalty.

The ICO and the Financial Conduct Authority (the “FCA”) signed a Memorandum of Understanding ("MoU") in February 2019 updated in light of the GDPR. In addition to continuing the existing cooperation between the ICO and the FCA through the exchange of information, and determining which of the two bodies is best placed to lead investigations of mutual interest, the MoU:

  • agrees that in case of a major incident of mutual interest at an FCA regulated firm, both will work together in line with agreed incident protocol to secure best customer outcomes and ensure incidents are dealt with in a coordinated and efficient way;
  • notes that where an investigation is to be carried out by both regulators, both investigations will usually proceed in parallel, although they will consider whether the particular circumstances suggest that one investigation should proceed before the other; and
  • notes that if a decision is made by either to take action against a subject, they should consider whether it is possible and would be appropriate to co-ordinate publication of applicable enforcement announcements (so that both parties publish the outcome of their investigations simultaneously).

For a fuller summary of the consultation, see our Data Notes on "How to calculate a GDPR fine – the proposed ICO way". Responses to the ICO's consultation are required by 5pm on Thursday 12 November 2020.

Related categories

Key contacts

Karen Anderson photo

Karen Anderson

Consultant, London

Karen Anderson
Susannah Cogman photo

Susannah Cogman

Partner, London

Susannah Cogman
Elizabeth Head photo

Elizabeth Head

Of Counsel, London

Elizabeth Head
Hannah Cassidy photo

Hannah Cassidy

Partner, Head of Financial Services Regulatory, Asia, Hong Kong

Hannah Cassidy
Clive Cunningham photo

Clive Cunningham

Partner, London

Clive Cunningham
Marina Reason photo

Marina Reason

Partner, London

Marina Reason
Kelesi Blundell photo

Kelesi Blundell

Partner, London

Kelesi Blundell
Jenny Stainsby photo

Jenny Stainsby

Global Head – Financial Services Regulatory, London

Jenny Stainsby
Hywel Jenkins photo

Hywel Jenkins

Partner, London

Hywel Jenkins
Chris Ninan photo

Chris Ninan

Partner, London

Chris Ninan
Jon Ford photo

Jon Ford

Partner, London

Jon Ford
Valerie Tao photo

Valerie Tao

Professional Support Lawyer, Hong Kong

Valerie Tao
Cat Dankos photo

Cat Dankos

Regulatory Consultant, London

Cat Dankos
Patricia Horton photo

Patricia Horton

Professional Support Lawyer, London

Patricia Horton