'Person' as in Section 13

[David Swarbrick]

In message <3.0.1.32.19990806141637.009789c0@pop-server>, Ian Miller
<Ian_Miller@scientia.com> writes
>
>An individual is a company's senior system administrator (as it happens I
>am; hence the interest) and they have access to company's master encryption
>keys.  However they only have access by dint of their position, not as a
>private individual.  Release of those keys to a third party is summary
>dismissal offence.  If the system administrator was personally served with
>a warrant, would they be justified in refusing to comply on the grounds
>that they, as a private person, have no lawful access to the key? 

No. The section would not allow such exceptions (you could refuse, and
hope to establish it as a reasonable excuse defence)

> If they
>were to comply, and were subsequently dismissed for doing so, would they
>have any claim to unfair dismissal? 

Only if he tipped off his employer that the key had been compromised! He
would then have a claim for unfair dismissal which he could no doubt
conduct from his prison cell.

> If the warrant was served on the
>company, then presumably the 'company' is deemed to know about the warrant.
> Under these circumstances who in the company could be told about it?  The
>directors, shareholders, employees?

Unspecified, but I am fairly sure the notice would be served on
individuals.

>
>It strikes me that the precise interpretation of this could be very
>important in organising the security measures protecting keys. 

Which is why it will probably not be precisely interpreted.

-- 
David Swarbrick, Solicitor, West Yorkshire
Web: http://www.swarb.co.uk/  david@swarb.freeuk.com Tel: +44(0)1484 722531
Home of the law-index (9800+ case digests).  IT and IP Law and contracts.
The Law Society regulates us in the conduct of investment business