R (Bridges) V. Chief Constable of South Wales Police (2020)
Definition
UK Court of Appeal decision holding that the deployment of automated facial recognition by South Wales Police lacked a sufficiently clear and precise legal framework under Article 8(2) ECHR, and that the data-protection impact assessment inadequately addressed algorithmic bias.
- Court
- England and Wales Court of Appeal
- Year
- 2020
- Legal basis
- Article 8(2) ECHR
- Subject
- Automated facial recognition (AFR)
Common questions
What specific legal gap did the Court of Appeal identify in the AFR deployment?+
It found the force's own policies left too much discretion over who could be placed on a watchlist and where the technology could be deployed, so the interference with private life was not in accordance with the law as Article 8(2) requires.
Did the Bridges ruling ban police use of facial recognition in the UK?+
No. It did not prohibit the technology outright but required forces to close the legal and policy gaps identified, including clearer watchlist criteria and a more rigorous assessment of algorithmic bias.
Related terms
- Consent Imbalance
- The structural condition recognised by EU data-protection authorities and courts under which formal consent to biometric collection is not freely given because...
- DPDP Act S.17(2) Exemptions
- Provisions of India's Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 allowing the Central Government to exempt State instrumentalities from the Act's requirements in...
- Informational Privacy
- The dimension of the right to privacy, articulated in Justice Chandrachud's Puttaswamy 2017 opinion, that grants individuals the right to control information...
- Proportionality Test (Puttaswamy)
- The four-part standard from Puttaswamy 2017 for assessing the constitutionality of state interference with privacy: (1) legitimate state aim, (2) suitability of...
- Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (UK)
- UK statute enacted in direct response to S and Marper v. UK, which reformed the retention framework for DNA profiles, fingerprints, and...
- Puttaswamy 2017
- Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1: nine-judge bench Supreme Court of India judgment holding that privacy...
- S and Marper V. UK (2008)
- European Court of Human Rights Grand Chamber judgment holding that indefinite retention of fingerprints, cellular samples, and DNA profiles of unconvicted individuals...
- Section 57 (Aadhaar Act, Struck Down)
- The provision of the Aadhaar Act 2016 that permitted private companies and individuals to require Aadhaar authentication for their own purposes, struck...
- UIDAI (Unique Identification Authority of India)
- The statutory authority established by the Aadhaar Act 2016 to operate the Aadhaar biometric identification system, oversee enrolment, and administer the authentication...