Legitimate Expectation Sample Clauses
Legitimate Expectation. The sharing of information by the Constabulary must fulfil a policing purpose. A policing purpose is defined under the Management of Police Information (MoPI) Code of Practice as: • Protecting life and property; • Preserving order; • Preventing the commissioning of offences; • Bringing offenders to justice; and • Any duty or responsibility of the police arising from common or statute law. It can be reasonably assumed that the persons from whom information is obtained will legitimately expect that the Constabulary will share it appropriately with any person or party that will assist in fulfilling the policing purposes mentioned above. Reference to the Force Information Charter would also provide them will full details.
Legitimate Expectation. The sharing of the information by police fulfils a policing purpose, in that it will be done in order to protect life in some circumstances and in others it will fulfil a duty upon the police provided by statute, (Children Act 2004) i.e. cooperation to improve the well being of children. It can reasonably be assumed that the persons from whom information is obtained will legitimately expect that police will share it appropriately with any person or agency that will assist in fulfilling the policing purposes mentioned above. If possible, and as far as is consistent with the welfare of the child concerned, explicit consent will be obtained by Family Services and Social Work before individual cases are brought to the MASH. In these cases, where consent has been granted, individuals will have a legitimate expectation of how their data is going to be used and with whom it may be shared and why. Consent is relevant to the rights of those to whom confidential information relates, and thus to legal obligations such as the Human Rights Act 1998. The sharing of the information with Children’s Safeguarding and Social Work may engage Article 8, however there will be no contravention provided that an exception within Article 8(2) applies. The benefits of effective information sharing for the purposes set out in this Agreement are to the direct benefit of the citizen and so in the public interest. This Agreement is: The promotion of the safety and welfare of children and ensuring they achieve all five outcomes is, by virtue of S.11 of Children Act 2004, a legitimate aim and major responsibility of the Partners to this Agreement. The sharing of information under this Agreement is also in line with Articles 2 and 3 of the Human Rights Act 1988, namely the right to life and the right to prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment. The need to intervene under section 47 of the Children Act 1989 where a child is at risk of significant harm is also a legitimate aim and major responsibility and the key aim of the MASH. The amount and type of information shared will only be the minimum necessary to achieve the aim of this Agreement. Information is always to be considered in terms of its relevance and proportionality in each set of circumstances, but it must always be remembered that the right to life is paramount and an absolute right. Information will only be shared on a “need to know” basis and only with those professionals who will need to act on the information...
Legitimate Expectation. The sharing of the information by police fulfils a policing purpose, in that it will be done in order to protect life in some circumstances and in others it will fulfil a duty upon the police provided by statute law (Children Act 2004) i.e. co-operation to safeguard or promote the well being of children. It can reasonably be assumed that the persons from whom information is obtained will legitimately expect that police will share it appropriately with any person or agency that will assist in fulfilling the policing purposes mentioned above. As previously identified consent will have been considered before the individual’s case is brought to the MASH. In cases, where consent has been granted individuals will have a legitimate expectation of how their data is going to be used and with whom it may be shared and why. Human Rights Act 1998 - Article 8: The Right to Respect for Private and Family Life, Home and Correspondence There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well- being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Consent is relevant to the rights of those to whom confidential information relates, and thus to legal obligations such as the Human Rights Act 1998. The sharing of information with children’s services may engage Article 8 however there will be no contravention provided that an exception within Article 8(2) applies. The benefits of effective sharing of information for the purposes set out in this agreement are to the direct benefit5 of the citizen and so in the public interest. This agreement is: The promotion of the welfare and wellbeing of children and ensuring they achieve all five outcomes is, by virtue of S.11 of Children Act 2004, a legitimate aim and major responsibility of the signatories to this agreement. The sharing of information under this agreement is also in line with Articles 2 and 3 of the Human Rights Act 1988, namely the right to life and the right to prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment. The amount and type of information shared will only be that necessary to achieve the aim of this agreement. Information is always to be considered in terms of its proportionality in each set of circumstances, but it ...
Legitimate Expectation. An individual's expectation as to how information given to a public body will be used will be relevant in determining whether the first data protection principle has been complied with.
Legitimate Expectation. Where individuals have consented to their information being shared, they will have a legitimate expectation that this will occur. Even where consent has not been sought, there is a legitimate expectation that relevant information will be shared by relevant authorities to ensure the safety and well-being of Adults at Risk. This is to ensure these organisations meet responsibilities placed on them by both statue and Common Law. It can reasonably be assumed that the persons from whom information is obtained will legitimately expect that the relevant authority will share it appropriately with any person or agency that will assist them in fulfilling the purposes mentioned above that the information was collected for. Details of this and most other non-sensitive information sharing agreements will be published in line with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, on the MPS Publication Scheme. This will also allow members of the public to understand how their personal information may be used by the MPS. This is in addition to the ready availability of the Fair Processing Notice mentioned above.
Legitimate Expectation. The sharing of the information by police fulfils a policing purpose, in that it will be done in order to protect life in some circumstances and in others it will fulfil a duty upon the police provided by statute law (Children Act 2004) i.e. co-operation to safeguard or promote the wellbeing of children. It can reasonably be assumed that the persons from whom information is obtained will legitimately expect that police will share it appropriately with any person or agency that will assist in fulfilling the policing purposes mentioned above. As previously identified consent will have been considered before the individual’s case is brought to the MASH. In cases, where consent has been granted individuals will have a legitimate expectation of how their data is going to be used and with whom it may be shared and why. Human Rights Xxx 0000 - Article 8: The Right to Respect for Private and Family Life, Home and Correspondence There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Consent is relevant to the rights of those to whom confidential information relates, and thus to legal obligations such as the Human Rights Xxx 0000.
Legitimate Expectation. The sharing of the information by police fulfils a policing purpose, in that it will be done in order to protect life in some circumstances and in others it will fulfil a duty upon the police provided by statute law (Children Act 2004) i.e. co-operation to safeguard or promote the well being of children. It can reasonably be assumed that the persons from whom information is obtained will legitimately expect that police will share it appropriately with any person or agency that will assist in fulfilling the policing purposes mentioned above. As previously identified consent will have been considered before the individual’s case is brought to the MASH. In cases, where consent has been granted individuals will have a legitimate expectation of how their data is going to be used and with whom it may be shared and why. In circumstances not satisfying the above, the individual should be notified at the earliest, reasonable opportunity unless reasonable steps to do so could not have been taken. There is a difference between being aware that something may happen, and knowing that it is happening. In this case, while we should not state the obvious, a privacy notice should actively be communicated when either:
Legitimate Expectation. An individual’s expectation as to how information given to a public body will be used will be relevant in determining whether the first data protection principle has been complied with. There is a legitimate expectation that an agency will do what they can to maximise fairness and protection under the law. The sharing of information within the terms of this agreement satisfies the expectation that information will be used for the purposes of crime reduction and prevention as well as the maintenance of public safety.
Legitimate Expectation. The sharing of the information by police fulfils a policing purpose, in that it will be done in line with policing principles in some circumstances and in others it will fulfil a duty upon the police provided by statute law, (Children Act 2004) i.e. cooperation to improve the well-being of children. It can reasonably be assumed that the persons from whom information is obtained will legitimately expect that police will share it appropriately, ensuring that any disclosure will be relevant, necessary and proportionate to the aims of this agreement, with any person or agency that will assist in fulfilling the policing purposes mentioned above. Human Rights - Article 8: The right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. The sharing of the information with children’s services may be in contravention of Article 8. However the benefits of an effective sharing of information for the purposes set out in this agreement are to the direct benefit of the citizen and so in the public interest. This agreement is: The promotion of the welfare and wellbeing of children and ensuring they achieve all five outcomes is, by virtue of S.11 of Children Act 2004, a legitimate aim and major responsibility of the signatories to this agreement. The sharing of information under this agreement is also in line with Articles 2 and 3 of the Human Rights Act 1988, namely the right to life and the right to prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment.
Legitimate Expectation. An individual’s expectation as to how data given to a public body will be used will be relevant in determining whether the first data protection principle has been complied with. This data sharing agreement is consistent with the legitimate expectations of providers of data to the MPS in that the data will be used for legitimate policing purposes. In this agreement the policing purposes are working in partnership to satisfy the provisions within the Children Act 2004. Educational establishments within London have all made their pupils aware of how their personal data is used by them and that sharing with the police may occur if it is felt that the police need to be aware of data on public safety grounds. This data sharing agreement will be published on the MPS Publication Scheme so that members of the public can see what is done with “their” data.