Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 12 DECEMBER 2017

Morrisons Found Vicariously Liable For A Data Breach Committed By One Of Its Employees

Reed Smith (Worldwide)
Explore more from Reed Smith (Worldwide)

Following a recent ruling by the High Court against WM Morrisons Supermarket PLC ("Morrisons"), employers may now find themselves vicariously liable for data breaches perpetrated by their employees.

United KingdomPrivacy
Cynthia O'Donoghue
Cynthia O'Donoghue
John O'Brien
John O'Brien
Eleanor Brooks
Eleanor Brooks
Author LinkedIn connections

Following a recent ruling by the High Court against WM Morrisons Supermarket PLC ("Morrisons"), employers may now find themselves vicariously liable for data breaches perpetrated by their employees (https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/judgments/various-claimants-v-wm-morrisons-supermarket-plc/).

Background

In 2014, it was discovered that a file containing the pay roll data of 99,998 Morrisons' employees had been uploaded to a file sharing website. This data included names, dates of birth, addresses, national insurance numbers, and details of employees' salaries and bank accounts.

Following an investigation, it was revealed that one of Morrisons' employees, Andrew Skelton – a senior IT auditor – had copied the data which he was supposed to send to KPMG, Morrisons' external auditors, to a personal USB drive. Mr Skelton then uploaded this data to a file-sharing website.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Ten AI Giants, One Regulator And A Lesson For Everyone Else: What The ICO’s Foundation Model Report Really Tells Us

The UK's Information Commissioner's Office has completed its supervision of major AI foundation model developers, revealing significant gaps in data protection practices and setting new expectations for legitimate interests assessments, transparency, and special category data handling. The regulator has now turned its attention to agentic AI systems, warning that autonomy is not an excuse for poor compliance and launching a call for evidence that will shape future regulatory guidance.
United KingdomPrivacy
Burges Salmon LLP
Burges Salmon LLP
Article

To Fine Or Not To Fine: EDPB Confirms Default Position In GDPR Enforcement Should Be To Fine

The European Data Protection Board has published draft guidelines proposing a fundamental shift in GDPR enforcement: a presumption that fines should be imposed for non-minor infringements, with a deliberately low bar for establishing negligence. Organizations will need to demonstrate robust compliance programs and documented decision-making to potentially avoid penalties, as regulators move from asking "should we fine?" to "can we justify not fining?"
GlobalPrivacy
Crowell & Moring LLP
Crowell & Moring LLP
Article

ICO Cookie Crackdown 2.0: The ICO’s New Storage And Access Technologies Guidance

The UK Information Commissioner's Office has finalized its guidance on storage and access technologies, expanding compliance requirements beyond traditional cookies to include tracking pixels, device fingerprinting, and web storage. Organizations must now navigate stricter consent standards and three new narrow exceptions introduced by the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, while facing significantly increased enforcement penalties of up to £17.5 million or 4% of annual worldwide turnover.
United KingdomPrivacy
ZwillGen
ZwillGen
Article

Private CCTV, Ring Doorbells And Police Investigations: Where Does UK GDPR Draw The Line?

Domestic surveillance technology has evolved from simple security cameras to sophisticated smart systems that may inadvertently create legal obligations for homeowners. When does a Ring doorbell or CCTV system transform an ordinary citizen into a data controller subject to UK GDPR, and what are the implications of millions of private cameras forming an unregulated surveillance network?
United KingdomPrivacy
HCR Law
HCR Law
Article

European Commission Press Release: EU AI Act Transparency Enforcement Starts This Sunday! Do You Know Who Your Chatbots Are? We Break Down The Commission’s Guidelines On Transparency Below

The European Commission has announced that EU AI Act transparency rules take effect August 2, 2026, requiring chatbots to identify themselves, deepfakes to be labeled, and AI-generated content to be marked. Organizations must assess whether their AI systems trigger disclosure, labeling, or content-marking requirements, with limited exceptions and penalties reaching €15 million or 3% of global turnover for noncompliance.
GlobalPrivacy
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Seyfarth Shaw LLP