g friendly and having an access to the defendant in his office, he had the opportunity to use police national computer to trace registration number of two vehicles, one on each count apparently for the purpose of his business and to get registration information about the said vehicles from the data available on line for this purpose.
In one instance out of two, there was no access to data base as the vehicle for which search was made was owned by a company and not by an individual and on the other there was an activation of database as the record of the person so required was available in the data base and hence, it was seen. Mr. English, being the outsider was not authorized to access the database and the defendant in this case was accused of unauthorized use of the information contained in the database as per the provisions of aforementioned Act 1984. It is, however, established that there was no subsequent use of that data from any quarter concerned. Defendant took the plea that there was neither unauthorized use of the data in terms of the provisions of the Act 1984 nor any act in contravention of the law is committed by the defendant and hence pleaded non guilty. Court of first instance pronounced him guilty on both of the accounts whereas the court of appeal overruled the decision of trial court.
In the case of R v. Dixion, defendant was charged with an offence under Data Protection Act 1984 on two accounts. First charge was that he tried to use the National police data for which he was unauthorized. Second charge was that he actually used the data for which he was not authorized. The court of first instance found him guilty on both the above mentioned instances. The defendant went into appeal against the decision and as the result of the appeal following legal questions were raised and discussed by the court.
It was debated that what constitute data in terms of the Act of 1984. The language of the Act 1984 Section 1(2) describes the data as information