This matter came before the Court of Appeal following the judgment of the High Court under Mr Justice McDermott which dismissed the appellant’s appeal.

The Appellant in this case submitted a subject access request to her former employer, Intesa Sanpaolo Life Limited, (ISPL) in September 2015.  The request was made under s.4 of the Data Protection Acts 1988 and 2003. By cover of a letter dated the 14th of October 2015, the Appellant’s employer supplied her with documentation pursuant to her request. On the 20th of October 2015, Ms. Nowak made a complaint to the Data Protection Commissioner pursuant complaining that her former employer had failed to provide her with certain personal data such as various e-mails, mediation settlement, completed performance and development form, etc. The Appellant also submitted a claim stating that her former employer had failed to advise her of her right to submit a complaint to the Office of the Data protection Commissioner.

An Investigation Officer in the Office of the Data Protection Commission (ODPC) informed the Appellant that her complaint would be investigated using full legal powers if necessary to resolve the matter. The ODPC then wrote to Intesa Sanpaolo Life Limited to advise that a complaint had been submitted that they were in breach of the Data Protection Acts.  ISPL’s view was that they had honoured the original Access Request. They also indicated that they had no difficulty in providing additional data which had been provided to the Appellant in January 2016.

After a full investigation was carried out by the ODPC, their findings were that it was reasonable for ISPL to interpret the Access Request as being limited solely to copies of the three categories of personal data specified in the Access Request and to therefore assume that the Complainant was not seeking the descriptions relating to the data pursuant to section 4(1)(a)(ii) of the Acts.

The Complainant then appealed the decision of the ODPC to the Circuit Court to claim the following;

1. An order setting aside the Commissioner’s decision;
2. An order remitting the complaint to the Commissioner;
3. A declaration that the decision was vitiated by a serious and significant error or series of such errors;
4. A declaration that the decision was wrong.

The Circuit Court dismissed the appeal and noted that the decision given by the ODPC on the 9th of December 2016 was an extensive and clear decision in relatively simple and straightforward terms.

The High Court also dismissed the appeal and noted that in reaching its decision, the request made by the Appellant was not made in wide and far reaching terms, but rather was made in concise terms.

The Court of Appeal was satisfied that none of the arguments canvassed by Ms. Nowak in her appeal were sufficient for the Court to find that the High Court erred in its treatment of her appeal on a point of law. Nor was there any merit in her argument that her submissions were ignored either in the Circuit Court or the High Court. The Court of Appeal therefore dismissed the case.

Guidance for Employers

It is clear that the language used when making a Data Access Request is of the utmost importance and even a single word (in this case, the use of the word namely) can change the entire meaning of a request.
https://www.courts.ie/view/judgments/858c5e82-109c-4a43-911a-751632e49c67/44471f20-4437-4c5f-9dce-45925fea42e3/2022_IECA_95%20(Unapproved).pdf/pdf