Pallas welcomes the High Court’s decision to dismiss Reform UK’s application to strike out Good Law Project’s data rights claim or obtain summary judgment in its favour. The Court concluded that none of the grounds advanced by Reform UK in support of its application were made out. The firm is acting for Good Law Project, which has brought the claim on behalf of approximately 50 individuals under Article 80 of the UK GDPR, enabling qualifying organisations to exercise data protection rights on behalf of individuals. The decision allows the case to proceed towards trial, with the Court also refusing Reform UK’s application for permission to appeal.
The Court made a significant costs order against Reform UK, requiring it to pay £40,000 towards Good Law Project’s costs of the application and £140,000 in respect of Pallas’s pro bono representation, payable to the Access to Justice Foundation.
In the first High Court ruling to consider whether a non-profit organisation meets the legal criteria to act as a representative body under Article 80 UK GDPR, the Court held that Good Law Project has a reasonable basis for arguing at trial that it has standing to do so, including that its objects are in the public interest and that it is active in the field of data protection. The Court further found that the claim raises triable issues of fact and has a real prospect of success. It also rejected Reform UK’s arguments that the claim discloses no reasonable grounds and constitutes an abuse of process.
The Pallas team representing Good Law Project is being led by partner Matt Getz, alongside counsel Rekha Rogers and Louise Lau, and associate Kelly Lillas. Andrew Sharland KC of 11 KBW, leading George Molyneaux of Blackstone Chambers, appeared for Good Law Project at the hearing. Further information on the case can be viewed here.
Matt Getz, Partner at Pallas Partners LLP commented: “The Court’s rejection of Reform UK’s application in this landmark case highlights the importance of Article 80 UK GDPR, which provides a vital mechanism for representative enforcement of data protection rights. This provision enables advocacy organisations such as the Good Law Project to act on behalf of individuals seeking to uphold their data rights.
The ruling makes clear that Good Law Project’s claim raises genuine issues requiring determination at trial and reinforces the fundamental necessity of compliance with data protection laws and accountability. Political parties hold significant volumes of personal data, and must take their legal obligations seriously; failing to respond properly to lawful requests regarding personal data is unacceptable and appropriately subject to judicial scrutiny. This case underlines that respect for data protection rights is not optional but a cornerstone of the rule of law.”
