SCL Elections Fined for Failing to Comply with Enforcement Notice

SCL Elections Prosecuted for Failing to Comply with Enforcement Notice

Earlier this month, the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) brought a criminal prosecution against the parent company of Cambridge Analytica, SCL Elections, for failing to comply with an enforcement notice issued by the ICO. SCL was fined 15,000 and ordered to pay costs. The criminal prosecution may not sound surprising ⎻ after all, SCL had failed to comply with an enforcement notice.

The ICO has prosecuted SCL Elections Ltd (SCL), formerly known as Cambridge Analytica, for failing to respond to an enforcement notice issued in May 2018. SCL pled guilty to breaching s47(1) of the Data Protection Act 1998 and was ordered to pay a …

SCL Elections Ltd, also known as Cambridge Analytica, has been fined 15,000 for failing to comply with an enforcement notice issued by the Information Commissioners Office (ICO). The company appeared at Hendon Magistrates Court and pleaded guilty through its administrators to breaching s47 (1) of the Data Protection Act 1998. The criminal prosecution related to the

SCL Elections pleaded guilty, via its administrators, to breaching section 47(1) of the Data Protection Act (DPA) 1998 in a prosecution brought by the Information Commissioners Office (ICO). Under that section of the Act, a person who fails to comply with an enforcement notice, an information notice or a special information notice is guilty of …

Background

SCL Elections Ltd is the UK-based parent company of the SCL Group, whose members include the scandal-plagued Cambridge Analytica ⎼ the company that continues to make global headlines for its role (along with Facebook) in having harvested the personal data of millions of data subjects without their consent, for the purposes of influencing public political opinion. SCL Group 1 (formerly Strategic Communication Laboratories 1) was a private British behavioural research and strategic communication company that came to prominence through the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data scandal involving its subsidiaries Cambridge Analytica and Crow Business Solutions MENA. 1 It was founded in 1990 by Nigel Oakes, who served as its CEO. 2

The Enforcement Notice

The ICO issued an enforcement notice, one day after SCL Elections went into administration, directing it to provide Professor Carroll with⁚ copies of the personal data it processed relating to Professor Carroll and a description of that data; details of any recipients of Professor Carrolls personal data; and details of the criteria used to determine the recipients of the data. The enforcement notice required the company to deal properly with Professor David Carrolls Subject Access Request. Despite the company having entered into administration, we are now pursuing a criminal prosecution for failing to properly deal with the enforcement notice. While we are still conducting our investigations and

The Prosecution

The ICO brought a criminal prosecution against SCL Elections for failing to comply with the enforcement notice. SCL Elections pleaded guilty, via its administrators, to breaching section 47(1) of the Data Protection Act (DPA) 1998 in a prosecution brought by the Information Commissioners Office (ICO). Under that section of the Act, a person who fails to comply with an enforcement notice, an information notice or a special information notice is guilty of an offence. The criminal prosecution related to the companys failure to respond to an enforcement notice issued in May 2018, which ordered the company to respond in full to a subject access request. The judge ruled the company had shown a willful disregard for the enforcement of data laws, but sentenced the company to pay less than 20,000even with the addition of some of the costs …

The Fine and Costs

SCL Elections was fined £15,000 and ordered to pay costs for failing to comply with the enforcement notice. It was also ordered to pay £1,133.75 towards prosecution costs. The ICO noted it had successfully prosecuted SCL Elections for failure to comply with an enforcement notice to hand over data when they were already in administration, fining them 18,000 … SCL Elections, the parent company of Cambridge Analytica, has been fined 15,000 for failing to hand over the personal data of US citizen, Professor David Carroll. The enforcement notice was issued one day … The single successful action against the Cambridge group was against SCL Elections for their failure to comply with an enforcement notice sent to them when they were already in administration. The …

Impact of the Prosecution

The ICOs prosecution of SCL Elections serves as a warning to other organizations that they must comply with data protection laws, even if they are in administration. It also highlights the ICOs commitment to enforcing data protection laws, even against companies that have been involved in high-profile scandals. The prosecution of SCL Elections is significant because it is one of the first instances of the ICO taking criminal action against a company for failing to comply with an enforcement notice. The ICO has also issued Facebook with a Notice of Intent to issue a monetary penalty in the sum £500,000 for lack of transparency and security issues relating to the harvesting of data constituting

Column 1	Column 2
Organization	SCL Elections Ltd
Former Name	Cambridge Analytica
Enforcement Body	Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO)
Enforcement Notice Issued	May 2018
Nature of Enforcement Notice	To respond to a subject access request made by a US citizen
Date of Prosecution	Early 2019
Outcome	Guilty plea
Fine	£15,000
Costs	£1,133.75
Relevant Legislation	Data Protection Act 1998, Section 47(1)

Column 1	Column 2
Key Individuals	Nigel Oakes (Founder and CEO of SCL Group)
Subject of Data Access Request	Professor David Carroll (US citizen)
Relevant Data Protection Act	Data Protection Act 1998 (now replaced by the UK GDPR)
Enforcement Action	Criminal prosecution for failure to comply with an enforcement notice
Key Points of the Case	SCL Elections failed to respond to a subject access request from a US citizen; The ICO issued an enforcement notice, but SCL Elections failed to comply. The company pleaded guilty to breaching Section 47(1) of the Data Protection Act 1998.
Outcome of the Case	SCL Elections was fined £15,000 and ordered to pay costs.
Impact of the Case	The case highlights the ICO’s commitment to enforcing data protection laws and serves as a warning to other organizations that they must comply with these laws.

Column 1	Column 2
Key Concepts	Explanation
Subject Access Request (SAR)	A request made by an individual to an organization to access their personal data held by that organization.
Enforcement Notice	A formal order issued by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) requiring an organization to comply with the Data Protection Act.
Data Protection Act 1998	The UK’s primary data protection law, which was replaced by the UK GDPR in 2018.
Criminal Prosecution	A legal process in which an individual or organization is charged with a crime and brought before a court of law.
Fine	A financial penalty imposed on an individual or organization for breaking the law.
Costs	Expenses incurred by the prosecution in bringing a case to court.
Administration	A process in which a company’s assets and liabilities are managed by an appointed administrator, usually when the company is facing financial difficulties.

Relevant Solutions and Services from GDPR.Associates

The case of SCL Elections highlights the importance of having robust data protection policies and procedures in place. GDPR.Associates can help your organization to comply with data protection laws through a range of services, including⁚

• Data Protection Audits⁚ We can conduct comprehensive audits to assess your organization’s data protection practices and identify areas for improvement.
• Data Protection Policies and Procedures⁚ We can help you develop and implement data protection policies and procedures that are tailored to your organization’s specific needs.
• Data Protection Training⁚ We can provide training to your employees on data protection laws and best practices.
• Data Subject Access Request (DSAR) Management⁚ We can help you manage DSARs efficiently and effectively, ensuring that you comply with the legal requirements.
• Data Breach Response⁚ We can provide guidance and support in the event of a data breach.
• GDPR Compliance⁚ We can help you achieve and maintain compliance with the GDPR and other relevant data protection laws.

By working with GDPR.Associates, you can ensure that your organization is protected from the risks associated with data breaches and non-compliance with data protection laws.

FAQ

What is SCL Elections?

SCL Elections is the parent company of Cambridge Analytica, a data analytics firm that gained notoriety for its involvement in the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data scandal. SCL Elections was based in the UK and was known for its work in political campaigning and strategic communication.

What was the enforcement notice about?

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) issued an enforcement notice to SCL Elections in May 2018. The notice required SCL Elections to respond to a subject access request made by a US citizen, Professor David Carroll. Carroll was seeking information about how SCL Elections had used his personal data. The ICO issued this notice because SCL had refused to disclose all personal data he was entitled to under the Data Protection Act 1998.

Why was SCL Elections prosecuted?

SCL Elections was prosecuted because it failed to comply with the ICO’s enforcement notice. Despite the notice being issued, SCL did not respond to the subject access request and was found to be in breach of the Data Protection Act 1998. The ICO’s prosecution served as a warning to other organizations that they must comply with data protection laws, even if they are in administration.

The prosecution of SCL Elections serves as a stark reminder of the importance of data protection compliance. The case highlights the ICO’s commitment to enforcing data protection laws and the potential consequences for organizations that fail to comply. The ICO’s actions send a clear message that organizations must take data protection seriously, regardless of their size or industry. Even in the face of administrative challenges, organizations are still required to comply with the law. The ICO is not afraid to take action against companies that fail to comply, even if they are in administration. The outcome of this case is a victory for data protection, as it demonstrates that organizations will be held accountable for their actions.

This case also highlights the importance of individuals exercising their right to access their personal data. Professor David Carroll’s persistence in seeking access to his data ultimately led to the prosecution of SCL Elections. The ICO’s prosecution of SCL Elections for failing to comply with an enforcement notice is a significant development in the field of data protection. The case demonstrates the ICO’s commitment to enforcing data protection laws and sending a clear message that organizations must comply with these laws.