On 10 July 2023, the European Commission adopted its long-awaited adequacy decision for the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework (the DPF). With immediate effect, the adequacy decision provides a new lawful basis for transfers from the EU to the U.S. This means that companies that participate in the DPF are able to transfer data from the EU to the U.S. without relying on another data transfer mechanism, such as Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) or binding corporate rules (BCRs).
Background to the Adequacy Decision
Pursuant to Article 45(3) of the GDPR, the European Commission has the power, by means of an adequacy decision, to decide that a non-EU country has sufficient standards of data protection to be treated as equivalent to those afforded in the EU.
Continue reading “The European Commission Adopts Adequacy Decision on EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework”
Yesterday, the Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) issued Meta Platforms Ireland Limited with a EUR 1.2 billion (approximately 1.3 billion U.S. dollar) fine for breaches of the GDPR with respect to EU-U.S. personal data transfers associated with its Facebook service. Meta Ireland has also been ordered to suspend all Facebook-related personal data transfers from the EU to the U.S., and to bring the processing of any previously transferred data into compliance.
Continue reading “Meta Fined EUR 1.2 Billion for Violating GDPR”
On 4 May 2023, the European Court of Justice (CJEU) delivered its highly anticipated judgement in Österreichische Post (Case C-300/21) on a crucial issue: the extent to which data subjects affected by a breach of the GDPR have a right to compensation for non-material damage under Article 82 GDPR.
The underlying case arose from a data subject in Austria seeking 1,000 EUR ($1,009) in compensation for alleged non-material damages arising from Österreichische Post’s processing of his personal data for the purposes of political advertising. The individual had not consented to the processing and claimed that he felt offended by the fact that an affinity to a certain political party was attributed to him, alongside feelings of great upset, loss of confidence and exposure caused by the retention of his data on these supposed political opinions.
Continue reading “Österreichische Post: The CJEU Specifies the Requirements for Compensation for Breaches of the GDPR”
Meta Ireland (Meta) has recently been issued with two fines by the Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) for breaches of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) relating to advertisements run on its Facebook and Instagram services. The decisions highlight some fundamental issues for all data controllers in respect of identifying the appropriate legal basis for their data processing operations and the need to be transparent about how personal data is used. The decisions also reveal some core differences in approach between the DPC, the Irish national privacy regulator in this case, and the European Data Protection Board (EDPB). It signals the likelihood of ongoing wrangling between the various European data regulators as they seek to interpret the decisions and as they are (inevitably) challenged through the courts.
The penalty imposed against Meta Ireland
The substantial fines of €210m (approximately $223m) with respect to Facebook and €180m (approximately $191m) with respect to Instagram reflect the consolidated turnover of the Meta group and the level of fines which, in the EDPB’s view, are required to be effective, proportionate and dissuasive in accordance with Article 83(1) of the GDPR. Meta now has 3 months to take corrective action and amend its privacy policies (including identifying an appropriate legal basis for processing) and its operations to bring its data processing in line with the GDPR.
Continue reading “Meta Fines Expose EU Regulators’ Differences and Highlight Fundamental Issues for Data Controllers”
On August 1, 2022, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued an opinion regarding a Lithuanian data protection case that may signal an expansion of interpretation of the definition of sensitive personal data under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Specifically, the CJEU found that data indirectly disclosing sexual orientation constitutes sensitive personal data.
At issue was a Lithuanian law that requires the Chief Official Ethics Commission of Lithuania to publish information about the private interests of public officials in an effort to combat corruption. In the facts underlying the case, a Lithuanian official objected to the Chief Official Ethics Commission’s online publication of his private interest information, which included his spouse’s name. The CJEU concluded that the publication of such information was prohibited by the GDPR because it was “liable to disclose indirectly the sexual orientation of a natural person,” a type of special category of personal data generally prohibited from processing under GDPR Article 9 (processing of special categories of personal data) unless certain additional conditions are satisfied such as the data subject’s explicit consent, or that processing is necessary for reasons of substantial public interest.
Continue reading “Court of Justice of the European Union Recognizes Inferred Special Categories of Personal Data”
The U.K. government recently launched a consultation proposing significant changes to the U.K. General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR). The U.K. aims to craft a bespoke “pro-growth and pro-innovation regime whilst maintaining…world-leading data protection standards.” The Consultation sets out in detail the significant reforms which the U.K. government seeks to implement – at the potential risk of losing its adequacy status for data transfers from the EU.
Continue reading “Significant Changes Proposed to UK GDPR”