Relevant DUA Act Provision: Section 71, Schedule 5; amends Articles 5(1)(b) and 6(4) UK GDPR and adds a new Article 8A and Annex 2 to the UK GDPR.
The DUA Act reforms the compatibility principle governing further processing of personal data by introducing statutory compatibility conditions and a new provision (Article 8A) in the UK GDPR. These provisions limit the need for a traditional compatibility assessment where certain legal and policy conditions are met.
Under the GDPR, controllers are required to assess whether the further processing purpose is compatible with the original purpose of collection, using contextual criteria in Article 6(4) and Recital 50, such as the link to the original purpose, the context of collection, the nature of data, and data subject’s expectations.
The DUA Act replaces this framework with a more rules-based framework for further processing, specifying circumstances in which the compatibility assessment under Article 6(4) UK GDPR is not required or is simplified. These statutory conditions are codified in the new Article 8A, which introduces a structured legal framework for compatibility by listing the exempted further processing scenarios. Article 8A(3) then refers to Annex 2, which enumerates specific categories of further processing that are also deemed compatible without a separate compatibility assessment. These exemptions from the compatibility assessment include:
In all cases, the further processing must still comply with the principles of fairness and transparency under Article 5, and appropriate safeguards, particularly under Article 89(1), must be applied where applicable.
Where the controller relied on consent for the original purpose, the further purpose will only be deemed compatible if fresh consent is obtained for the further processing and the processing is either (i) solely to ensure compliance with Article 5(1) data protection principles, or (ii) falls within Annex 2 and the controller cannot reasonably be expected to obtain new consent.
Annex 2 is legally anchored in Article 8A(3), which delegates to it the role of specifying additional forms of further processing deemed inherently compatible with the original purpose.
Annex 2 of Schedule 5 sets out additional statutory examples of further processing that shall be treated as compatible with the original purpose. This is a limited list of processing for the purposes of:
The Secretary of State may expand or revise this list by regulation. This mechanism introduces flexibility but also raises rule of law concerns about foreseeability and the scope of ministerial discretion.
This statutory presumption replaces the open-textured compatibility balancing test for listed purposes, enhancing legal certainty and operational efficiency. However, for commercial or non-exempted secondary uses, the compatibility analysis under Article 6(4) still applies, albeit with less detailed contextual criteria than under the GDPR. The reform thus creates a two-tier model of further processing in the UK.
Notably, the DUA Act does not alter the requirement that the further purpose be specified and transparent to data subjects under Article 5(1)(b). Nor does it diminish the relevance of fairness and accountability under Articles 5(1)(a) and 5(2). Controllers must still justify the further use on the basis of proportionality and necessity when outside the statutory exemptions.
The UK model departs from the EU’s nuanced, case-by-case compatibility framework. It introduces a more rules-based system that simplifies assessments for certain further processing purposes, such as those listed in Annex 2 or expressly permitted under Article 8A(2) and (3), which together form the backbone of the UK’s new statutory compatibility regime. This statutory presumption replaces the open-textured compatibility balancing test for those purposes, enhancing legal certainty and operational efficiency. However, for commercial or non-exempted secondary uses, the compatibility analysis under Article 6(4) still applies, albeit with less prescriptive contextual criteria than under the GDPR. The reform thus creates a two-tier model of further processing in the UK. The scope for ministerial discretion over future categories raises regulatory concerns around legal certainty and foreseeability.
Notably, the DUA Act does not alter the requirement that the further purpose be specified and transparent to data subjects under Article 5(1)(b). Nor does it diminish the relevance of fairness and accountability under Articles 5(1)(a) and 5(2). Organisations must still justify the further use on the basis of proportionality and necessity when outside the statutory exemptions.
In its updated to the DUA Bill (prior to the Bill receiving parliamentary approval), the ICO stated that amendments, particularly for scientific research, archiving, and statistical purposes are easier to navigate and understand,” provide organisations with greater certainty, and enable responsible reuse of personal data. The ICO emphasises, however, that compliance with safeguards under Article 89(1) remains critical. The ICO intends to publish new updated relevant on Research, Archiving and Statistics with a public consultation planned, in Spring 2026.
This article is part of a twelve-part series analysing the key legal reforms introduced by the Data Use and Access Act (DUA Act), which came into force on 19 June 2025. The series examines the most significant areas of divergence and convergence between the DUA Act and the EU GDPR, drawing on both the legislation itself and provisional guidance from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Each article provides legal context, highlights regulatory shifts, and offers practical compliance insights. The twelve core areas covered in this series are:
|
Former Kilkenny hurler DJ Carey has pleaded guilty to 10 charges related to defrauding people out of money while pretending to have cancer.
The 54-year-old, who previously resided at The Drive, Newtown, Maynooth, County Kildare, made the pleas during an appearance at Ireland’s Circuit Court where he was due to stand trial.
A five-time All-Ireland winner and multiple All-Star, Carey is one of the most decorated and acclaimed hurlers to ever play the sport.
Carey stood to enter guilty pleas on 10 counts of dishonestly inducing people to pay him money after he fraudulently claimed to have cancer and needed finances for treatment.
The court heard that one deception charge was being struck out while the remainder of the indictment would be taken into consideration by the sentencing judge.
A defence lawyer told the court that while cancer was referred to in the charges, Carey “does have very genuine health conditions” and required surgery for a heart condition.
He was remanded on bail and is due to be sentenced on 29 October.
Saudi Ambassador Meets Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to Strengthen Bilateral Ties
Ansar M Bhatti / DNA
Islamabad, 2 Jul – The Ambassador of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to Pakistan, Nawaf bin Saeed Al-Malkiy, called on Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif today at the Prime Minister’s Office in Islamabad. The meeting underscored the deep-rooted fraternal relations between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, with discussions focusing on enhancing bilateral cooperation in various fields, including trade, investment, and regional peace.
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif extended his heartfelt regards to the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, reaffirming Pakistan’s strong bond with the Kingdom. The Prime Minister fondly recalled his recent telephone conversation with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman on 24 June, during which both leaders reiterated their commitment to further strengthening Pak-Saudi ties.
Ambassador Al-Malkiy conveyed greetings from the Saudi leadership and expressed the Kingdom’s desire to expand cooperation with Pakistan in multiple sectors, including energy, infrastructure, and human resource development. He emphasized Saudi Arabia’s continued support for Pakistan’s economic stability and progress.
The meeting highlighted the importance of accelerating ongoing projects under the Saudi-Pakistan Supreme Coordination Council (SPSCC), a high-level platform established to boost economic and strategic collaboration. Both sides reviewed progress on Saudi investments in Pakistan’s energy, mining, and agriculture sectors, with the Prime Minister assuring full facilitation for Saudi investors.
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif lauded Saudi Arabia’s role in promoting peace and stability in the region, particularly its efforts in mediating global conflicts. He reiterated Pakistan’s support for the Kingdom’s Vision 2030, a transformative economic and social reform blueprint aimed at reducing Saudi Arabia’s dependence on oil and diversifying its economy.
The two leaders also exchanged views on key regional and international developments, including the situation in the Middle East and South Asia. The Prime Minister appreciated Saudi Arabia’s steadfast support on the Kashmir issue and its consistent stance at multilateral forums, including the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
Ambassador Al-Malkiy reaffirmed Saudi Arabia’s commitment to playing a constructive role in fostering dialogue and stability in the region. He praised Pakistan’s efforts in counterterrorism and its contributions to regional peace.
Recognizing the significant Pakistani diaspora in Saudi Arabia, the Prime Minister thanked the Kingdom for its hospitality towards Pakistani expatriates, who contribute substantially to both economies. Discussions also touched upon enhancing cultural exchanges, religious tourism, and educational collaborations between the two nations.
The meeting concluded with a mutual commitment to further elevate the historic Pakistan-Saudi relationship. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif expressed optimism about future collaborations, stating, “Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are bound by unbreakable ties of faith, brotherhood, and mutual trust. We are determined to take this partnership to new heights.”
Ambassador Al-Malkiy reiterated Saudi Arabia’s unwavering support for Pakistan’s prosperity and stability, assuring that the Kingdom would continue to stand by Pakistan in all circumstances.
The diplomatic engagement reflects the shared vision of both nations to deepen their strategic alliance and work together for regional peace and economic growth.
Marshall has unveiled the second-gen iteration of its portable Middleton Bluetooth speaker. The Middleton II adds further features to the original model, promising to deliver “the ultimate listening experience wherever it goes”.
The new speaker is powered by 60 watts of Class D amplification for its twin 7.6cm woofers alongside 20 watts of power for a pair of 15mm tweeters. Marshall promises improved sonic talents with this iteration over the first-gen model, teasing “even deeper bass and more refined performance at maximum volume”.
The new speaker packs Marshall’s ‘True Stereophonic’ sound tech, which aims to deliver a room-filling signature no matter where you’re standing in relation to the Middleton II, a feature boasted by the likes of the Marshall Kilburn III earlier this year.
The Middleton II offers over 30 hours of portable playtime for when you’re on the go, as well as an IP67 water- and dust-proof certification to ensure it’s protected whether you’re slumming it in a tent or heading to the beach.
Like the JBL Charge 6, the Marshall Middleton II doubles as a portable power bank for juicing up your phone on the go. It’s also fitted with a built-in microphone, meaning you can take hands-free calls when you’re out and about.
According to Ebba Gourveneur Regnström, Marshall’s product manager: “Extending portable playtime is something we put a lot of work into at Marshall, and Middleton II is no exception with its 30 hours (of battery life).”
Combine that with improved features such as a built-in microphone for seamless speakerphone calls, and a refreshed design that not only looks better but also “enhances usability with improved user experience”.
The Marshall Middleton II is available now in cream or black finishes, priced at £260 (further prices pending).
MORE:
Read our JBL Flip 7 review
These are the best Bluetooth speakers you can buy
7 tracks we’ve been using in our test rooms over the past month
Since the creation of this programme in 1999, more than 142 researchers from all over the world have benefited from this programme and received a grant, allowing them to conduct their research and, where relevant to visit the IOC Olympic Studies Centre in Lausanne, Switzerland to consult its collections (including primary sources from the IOC’s historical archives).
All current postgraduate students enrolled in a PhD degree programme within the human and/or social sciences encompassing Olympism, the Olympic Movement or the Olympic Games as, at least, one of their research foci.
All academic staff members and postdoctoral fellows who have completed their doctorate or equivalent highest degree (including masters, depending on the field) in or after 2023, are also eligible.
Application files and any related correspondence should be sent to the OSC before 22 September 2025. The programme’s rules and guidelines and the application form are available on our website.
The Grant Programme Selection Committee is composed of academic experts who are internationally renowned for their involvement in Olympic studies and of OSC representatives.
University professors, lecturers and research fellows who have completed their doctorate and who hold an academic/research appointment are eligible to apply to the Advanced Olympic Research Grant Programme. This programme aims to promote advanced research by established researchers with a humanities or social sciences perspective in priority fields of research, which are identified every two years by the IOC. See here for additional information.
We invite you to discover the Olympic World Library (OWL), our library catalogue entirely dedicated to Olympic knowledge, with over 42.000 official and academic publications.You will also find an overview of the IOC historical archives, accessible via the OSC. For more information on the IOC Olympic Studies Centre, its resources, services and programmes, visit our website or contact studies.centre@olympic.org.
Cheryl Kyinn, PA-C
(Credit: OCParkinsons.com)
Although levodopa is considered the cornerstone treatment in Parkinson disease (PD), its long-term use may be limited by motor complications and the inability to slow neurodegeneration. Early in treatment, motor control is strong, but over time, striatal changes can cause dopamine levels to rely entirely on external sources, leading to OFF episodes. Current strategies aim to optimize dopaminergic stimulation to better mimic natural, tonic dopamine activity through pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, adjunctive, rescue, and device-aided approaches.1
At the recently concluded 4th Annual Advanced Therapeutics in Movement and Related Disorders (ATMRD) Congress, held by the PMD Alliance from June 27-30, 2025, movement disorder expert Cheryl Kyinn, PA-C, gave a talk about on-demand therapies that can help offer relief for OFF episodes in patients with PD and how to go about using them. In this session, Krinn, a physician assistant specializing in PD in Orange County, California, placed an emphasis on recent findings from clinical trials that documented the timing and optimal use of these medications.
In a new iteration of NeuroVoices, Kyinn discussed her clinical approach to selecting on-demand therapies for patients with PD experiencing OFF episodes. She highlighted the importance of considering comorbidities, patient preferences, and proper administration education to ensure treatment efficacy. Kyinn also underscored the advantages of therapies that bypass the gastrointestinal tract and the value of open-label data supporting options like inhaled levodopa. Additionally, she advocated for early adoption of extended-release levodopa to help reduce motor fluctuations and stressed shared decision-making to optimize patient quality of life.
Cheryl Kyinn, PA-C: It’s very similar to how you would make any medication choice for a patient. The first thing is the baseline characteristics of a patient. Do they have other comorbidities? Because, let’s say, the 2 options are quite different and have different adverse effect profiles, so you want to first look at that.
For instance, if you’re doing an apomorphine subcutaneous injection, that might have a little bit more susceptibility to hypotension and nausea. If someone’s already hypotensive, like many of our patients with PD, you probably wouldn’t go for that one. But let’s say a patient has a comorbidity of COPD, you’re probably not going to go with inhaled levodopa powder, because they probably can’t inhale it. That’s 1 key factor.
Of course, you also have patient preference. Maybe patients are needle-phobic, or maybe patients honestly, they can’t get over the administration adverse effects. I think the number one thing is patient choice. First of all, I get a lot of needle-phobic patients, so that’s easy off the bat. And then again, their comorbidities as well.
The key thing is that we know all of our oral medications run into the gastrointestinal dysfunction issues. Of course, seeing how these are delivered and that they bypass the GI tract that’s a huge thing.
I think one of the most interesting studies was the open-label study for morning akinesia. I mean, that’s huge. We don’t have a lot of stuff—actually hardly anything—that helps with that, right? I actually tell my patients, just put your first pill on your bedside, and as soon as you get up, just reach over and swallow it. But again, you have the gastrointestinal dysfunction. The study with morning akinesia was very helpful and great for us clinicians to know that there is an option for this very tough symptom that patients experience.
For the inhaled levodopa powder, I think it’s a little bit easier to use because you don’t have to do a needle. I did make a joke that it’s kind of similar to smoking but it kind of is. When I’ve seen patients do it, I’m like, it kind of looks like that. But I think the ease of use is helpful, and you see the improvement in the UPDRS score quickly, within 10 minutes. But I guess that’s the other point:, both of them show that T-max concentration within 10 to 20 minutes, and that’s a big factor in wanting to use these on-demand therapies for OFF times.
I think education, education, education, and setting expectations. For instance, if you don’t tell a patient that they might have the cough issue with the inhaled levodopa powder, they will—when they first encounter that cough. First, they’re going to do it wrong, and they’re going to assume it’s like any other inhaler that they’ve seen like an asthma inhaler where you take a big puff and they’ll cough it all out. Not only, 1, do they have the adverse effect, 2, they’re going to cough it all out and not even get the therapeutic effect of the medication.
Same thing with apomorphine. I think if you set the precedent that, yes, there’s a possibility you can have hypotension and nausea, especially because there’s no current antiemetic therapy that we can give to counter that, at least if they know about it and it happens. They’re not going to be completely caught off guard and then just choose to discontinue either of the medications.
Setting good expectations, educating the patient on what could happen, and letting them know that if it happens, it’s okay it’s not going to be permanent. It’s going to be very short and brief and mild to moderate, I guess, based off of clinical trials. You’ll get over it, and if you don’t like it, then you don’t have to do it again. That’s the first part of it. And luckily, the companies also I think send nurses to the patient’s home to educate them about that as well, and to help them administer their first couple of doses. So hopefully there’s that continuity of care.
Honestly, I think from the get-go, based off all the clinical data that we have now, the preference is showing that ER formulations are much preferred. All the data suggests that, unfortunately, even though IR levodopa is great and cheap and effective, long-term use of this volatile pulsing of the medication is going to cause issues over time.
We definitely see that with our patients who’ve had long-standing PD where we feed into the motor fluctuations. I think presenting patients with that data, if we can, we should start them on an ER formulation. But let’s say they are on an IR formulation then, when they start experiencing these motor fluctuations because we know it’s a question of when, not a question of if that, for sure, is a reason. If accessibility wasn’t an issue and cost wasn’t an issue, for sure, as soon as they start experiencing motor fluctuations, we should switch to an ER formulation if possible.
I always try to tell my patients when we’re together, I’m here to provide you with the information, and I will guide you on what I think might work best for you but ultimately, they’re in the driver’s seat. It’s a full-on conversation that we’re having. It’s not a one-sided, “I tell you what to do” situation. I’ll even tell patients, “I’m not your mom—I can’t make you do anything,” It’s all up to you. This is your life, the life that you’re living. But it is an open discussion between clinical provider and patient. And I tell them, we’re trying to optimize your quality of life. And the decision-making process is 2-fold. I provide information, and then we, together, pick what’s best for your life, what fits into your lifestyle, with the ultimate goal of improving quality of life.
Transcript edited for clarity. Click here for more coverage of ATMRD 2025.