Common use of Proportionality and necessity Clause in Contracts

Proportionality and necessity. Proportionality, data minimization, necessity and not being excessive are factors to be taken into consideration when deciding whether to share personal information. In making the decision, employees must weigh up what might happen as a result of the information being shared against what might happen if it is not, and apply their professional judgement. It is for this reason professionals must ensure they comply with Article 5(1)(c) and share the adequate and relevant information, and limit that information to what is necessary for the achieving of the DSA aims. There are legal safeguards which mean that it is a defence when sharing that you believed it was: ● necessary for the purposes of preventing or detecting crime ● required or authorised by an enactment, by a rule of law or by the order of a court or tribunal ● in the particular circumstances, was justified as being in the public interest. Or that you acted in the reasonable belief that: ● the person had a legal right to do the obtaining, disclosing, procuring or retaining ● the person would have had the consent of the controller if the controller had known about the obtaining, disclosing, procuring or retaining and the circumstances of it, or ● the person acted— (i) for the special purposes, (ii) with a view to the publication by a person of any journalistic, academic, artistic or literary material, and (iii) in the reasonable belief that in the particular circumstances the obtaining, disclosing, procuring or retaining was justified as being in the public interest Professionals must record: ● the decision to share, or not to share ● the lawful basis for sharing ● to whom the information was shared This will enable you to account for decisions made.

Proportionality and necessity. ‌ Proportionality, data minimization, necessity and not being excessive are factors to be taken into consideration when deciding whether to share personal information. In making the decision, employees must weigh up what might happen as a result of the information being shared against what might happen if it is not, and apply their professional judgement. It is for this reason professionals must ensure they comply with Article 5(1)(c) and share the adequate and relevant information, and limit that information to what is necessary for the achieving of the DSA aims. When sharing under Part 3 and if it is sensitive data, then the sharing must be strictly necessary. There are legal safeguards which mean that it is a defence when sharing that you the Data Controller believed it was: ● necessary for the purposes of preventing or detecting crime ● required or authorised by an enactment, by a rule of law or by the order of a court or tribunal ● in the particular circumstances, was justified as being in the public interest. Or that you the Data Controller acted in the reasonable belief that: ● the person had a legal right to do the obtaining, disclosing, procuring or retaining ● the person would have had the consent of the controller if the controller had known about the obtaining, disclosing, procuring or retaining and the circumstances of it, or ● the person acted— (i) for the special purposes, (ii) with a view to the publication by a person of any journalistic, academic, artistic or literary material, and (iii) in the reasonable belief that in the particular circumstances the obtaining, disclosing, procuring or retaining was justified as being in the public interest Professionals must record: ● the decision to share, or not to share ● the lawful basis for sharing ● to whom the information was shared This will enable you the Data Controller to account for decisions made.

Proportionality and necessity. Proportionality, data minimization, necessity and not being excessive are factors to be taken into consideration when deciding whether to share personal information. In making the decision, employees must weigh up what might happen as a result of the information being shared against what might happen if it is not, and apply their professional judgement. It is for this reason professionals must ensure they comply with Article 5(1)(c) and share the adequate and relevant information, and limit that information to what is necessary for the achieving of the DSA aims. There are legal safeguards which mean that it is a defence when sharing that you believed it was: ● • necessary for the purposes of preventing or detecting crime ● • required or authorised by an enactment, by a rule of law or by the order of a court or tribunal ● • in the particular circumstances, was justified as being in the public interest. Or that you acted in the reasonable belief that: ● • the person had a legal right to do the obtaining, disclosing, procuring or retaining ● • the person would have had the consent of the controller if the controller had known about the obtaining, disclosing, procuring or retaining and the circumstances of it, or ● • the person acted— (i) for the special purposes, (ii) with a view to the publication by a person of any journalistic, academic, artistic or literary material, and (iii) in the reasonable belief that in the particular circumstances the obtaining, disclosing, procuring or retaining was justified as being in the public interest Professionals must record: ● • the decision to share, or not to share ● • the lawful basis for sharing ● • to whom the information was shared This will enable you to account for decisions made.