Skip to content
Request a demonstration

Legal Intelligence

Privacy and Data Rights

Data-rights requests, data-processing agreements, breach-response support, retention, transfer rules and privacy obligations, joined to the privacy workspace and the sub…

Demonstration: Pellam Diagnostics Ltd (fictional) · Medical devices. Fictional data and a scripted answer.

The situation

Organisation
Pellam Diagnostics Ltd (fictional)
Who is asking
Data protection officer
Industry
Medical devices
What happened
A person has asked the company for a copy of the personal data it holds about them, and the officer must decide which systems to search.

The question asked

Which systems should we search to answer this request, and which are off limits?

What it reads, and who can see the result

  • System inventory registerSystems that hold personal data, with their sensitivity.
  • Request details formThe identifiers supplied by the requester.
Reads
The system inventory and counts of records by system; the search itself is run later, by the owners.
Does not read
The records themselves at this step.
Permission
The data protection officer's access to the inventory.
Who sees it
The officer and the system owners.

Try it

Choose what the platform may read. Restricted material cannot be put in scope here, and a classification the analysis is unsure of must be verified by a person.

Read it?SourceHoldsSensitivityWhat the analysis thinks it is
Customer relationship system
Cloud CRM
18,400 recordsinternalContact and order history clear
Support ticket archive
Helpdesk
52,000 recordsinternalSupport correspondence clear
Marketing consent log
Email platform
31,000 recordsinternalConsent and preferences clear
Clinical trial participant records
Research share
4,200 recordsrestrictedHealth data of trial participants clear
Legal matter files
Document system
9,100 recordsrestrictedPrivileged advice check
Old shared mailbox
Mail archive
77,000 recordsinternalGeneral correspondence check

Sources in scope
0 of 6
records in scope
0
Restricted, kept out
2 sources
To verify
0

The answer

Simulated answer. Written for this fictional case, not produced by a live model. Only the figures in it are computed, from what you decided above.

0 of 6 systems are in the search, 0 records to be searched by their owners.

Search scope is a judgement about where this person's data may be and what the company may open [S1][S2]. The clinical records and legal files are restricted: they cannot be brought into scope here, and the officer must ask their owners separately whether they hold relevant data.

Two classifications are uncertain (the legal files and the old mailbox) and a person must verify them before the scope is final. 0 included source(s) still need that check.

Relies on: S1 · System inventory, personal dataS2 · Request SAR-0412 (fictional)

Review and approval

The data protection officer decides. Approving sends search instructions to the system owners for the sources in scope. It does not disclose anything to the requester.

Not ready to approve. Choose at least one source to read first.

In the product this is a different person with the right permission. Here you play that role to see the rule.

What it produces

registerDraft, not approved

Search instruction

  • 0 systems to search, 0 records.
  • 2 restricted systems to be raised with their owners separately.
evidenceDraft, not approved

Scoping decision

  • Recorded with the verification of each uncertain classification.

Limits of this example

  • The inventory is synthetic; a real inventory is only as complete as the organisation keeps it.
  • Scoping does not assess whether an exemption applies to any record.
  • This is a scripted demonstration on fictional data. No model was called and no real organisation, person or result is shown.