Personal legal expenses insurance could help you and your family with a number of legal issues, depending on what cover you have. This site can help you learn about legal expenses insurance, how to get it, and how to use it if you have it.
See what we offer to our people
Legal expenses insurance can help you with a number of legal issues affecting your business.
News and analysis from our experts
Many brokers and law firms have chosen to partner with DAS. Here you can find out why our partners choose us, and how you can join them.
We've now made it even easier for customers to make a claim. Here you can find out how.
Facial recognition cameras have been installed quietly cross the country, which has sparked controversy amongst privacy campaigners and the public who are unsure about the growing use of facial recognition technology. These devices are just the latest additions to a growing system of increasingly intrusive snooping on the population.
Where does the law stand on the use of facial recognition software?
Elisa Ribeiro, legal adviser at DAS Law, tells you what you need to know…
The Information Commissioner’s Office defines facial recognition technology as “the process by which a person can be identified or otherwise recognised from a digital facial image” and in essence explains that a facial recognition camera will capture a person’s image, take details of that person’s specific facial characteristics, store it and compare it to images already captured to check if there is a match.
There is no specific facial recognition law in the UK, however, the Information Commissioner’s Office has set out specific responsibilities in the Data Protection Act 2018 and other legislation.
On the 18th June 2021, the public concern about the potential misuse of live automated facial-recognition technology in public places was addressed by the Information Commissioner’s Opinion report which clarified the legal requirements for the use of facial recognition technology stating that the law requires controllers to “demonstrate that their processing can be justified as fair, necessary and proportionate”
The Information Commissioner’s Opinion also highlighted that controllers seeking to deploy Live Facial Recognition must:
Whilst facial recognition technology can be legal, the lack of specific legislation has led to some organisations getting it wrong.
In 2020 the court of appeal in R (Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales held that the use of automated facial recognition technology by the South Wales Police Force was in breach of Article 8 of the European Court of Human Rights due to no clear guidance on where automated facial-recognition could be used and who could be put on a watch list, therefore, more guidance was needed.
An update to the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice was laid before Parliament on 16 November 2021 and came into effect on 12 January 2022. The guidelines are as follows:
System operators should adopt the following 12 guiding principles:
There is no legal basis on which the public can appeal against the installation of a camera, however Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commission has set out some general ethical principles that should be applied to any trial of live facial recognition technology. These include:
If a member of the public felt that the technologies were to be used for any unlawful recording, they could look to challenge the police (or other organisation) if they were to feel that their privacy was being invaded. However, if the police can show that they have legitimate aim and meet the oversight and regulation framework outlined by the Commission, their use of the technology is likely to be justified.
There is no legislation in place prohibiting the use of face covering, however, the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 state that the police have the power to require removal of facial coverings in England and Wales if they feel they are being worn for the purpose of concealing identity and if they believe incidents involving violence may take place in any locality.
It is highly unlikely that a member of the public would be able to install facial recognition technology at their property unless they had a specified purpose which is in pursuit of a legitimate aim and necessary to meet an identified pressing need.
If a member of the public found that someone was invading their right to privacy with the use of facial recognition technology, they should report that potential breach of data to the Information Commissioner’s Office and potentially to the police to consider whether any criminal act had been committed.
Anyone who believe that they have been misidentified by the facial recognition technology or believes that their image has been taken unlawfully should seek legal advice and contact the Information Commissioner’s Office.
What to do if the council won’t fix the potholes on your road