Part III, Using Personal Data in AI System Development, Testing and Monitoring
Is this legally binding?
Guidance. Voluntary guidance. Best practice, not obligation, until a contract or a regulator cites it.
Explains how AI developers may rely on the Business Improvement Exception or Research Exception (instead of consent) to use personal data for AI development, testing and monitoring, plus data protection considerations including minimisation, controls and anonymisation.
What this connects to
9 relations. Official relations are the ones the source documents state; anything marked GAGE analysis is our reading, not an agency's.
Part of1
- SectionPart 4, Collection, Use and Disclosure of Personal DataBinding
Guideline interprets binding PDPA provision; guideline itself is not legally binding
Cites8
- ConceptBusiness Improvement Exception (as Applied to AI Development)Guidance
Structural decomposition of the source instrument
- ObligationConditions for Relying on the Business Improvement ExceptionGuidance
Structural decomposition of the source instrument
- ObligationUsing the Business Improvement Exception for Testing and Bias AssessmentGuidance
Structural decomposition of the source instrument
- ConceptResearch Exception (as Applied to AI R&D)Guidance
Structural decomposition of the source instrument
- ObligationConditions for Relying on the Research ExceptionGuidance
Structural decomposition of the source instrument
- ObligationData Minimisation in AI Development (Good Practice)Guidance
Structural decomposition of the source instrument
- ObligationData Protection Controls in the AI Development EnvironmentGuidance
Structural decomposition of the source instrument
- ObligationAnonymisation of Datasets for AI DevelopmentGuidance
Structural decomposition of the source instrument
Verified against the official source on 2026-08-17. GAGE is not affiliated with or endorsed by any agency named here, and nothing on this page is legal advice. How this is built and checked.