second issue relates the approach to be taken by the Tribunal to
consideration of justification of interference (the Justification Issue).
9. The Interference Issue is posited on the hypothesis that the
Respondent holds no relevant data on the Complainant. There is no issue
between the parties that, if relevant data are held, then Article 8 is
engaged. The question is whether the NCND policy response is in itself
capable of being an interference with the Complainant's right to respect
for private life under Article 8 of the Convention, if there are in fact no
relevant data held on him. Article 8 provides
"1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life,
his home and his correspondence.
2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the
exercise of this right except 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."
10.
The parties have framed the Interference Issue in the following terms:
" Whether the giving of a NCND response by the Respondent to a
subject access by a particular individual is capable of amounting to
an interference that individual's Article 8 rights, even if no personal
data relating to that individual are in fact held by the Respondent."
11.
It is agreed that it will be for the Tribunal, in due course, to ascertain in
private and, in accordance with the Rules, without involvement of the
Complainant, whether any relevant data are in fact held on the
Complainant, and why it is said that, in the circumstances of his particular