European Data Protection Supervisor Says GDPR Still 'Legal Puzzle' for Companies
The 2018 EDPS annual report released Tuesday shows that the number of data privacy complaints increased by 111 percent from 2017 to 2018. And the number of admissible complaints that led to investigations spiked by 132 percent.
February 27, 2019 at 04:18 PM
4 minute read
The European Union's independent data protection authority has released his 2018 annual report, which indicates that companies are still struggling to adapt to the General Data Protection Regulation, which took effect last May.
“So far, rather than adapting their way of working to better protect the interests of those who use their services, companies seem to be treating the GDPR more as a legal puzzle, in order to preserve their own way of doing things,” European Data Protection Supervisor Giovanni Buttarelli wrote in the report.
“We should expect this to change over the coming year, however,” added Buttarelli. He presented his report Tuesday to the European Parliament's Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs.
The supervisor office, which hears and investigates privacy-related complaints, received 298 complaints in 2018, a 111 percent increase over 2017.
While 240 of the complaints were inadmissible as they related to data processing at a national level rather than by an EU institution or group, the remaining 58 complaints spurred in-depth inquiries, a 132 percent increase compared with the number of complaints that led to investigations in 2017.
One admissible complaint highlighted in the report centered on an unnamed EU institution that organized an international conference and required attendees to submit scanned copies of their passports or identity cards to register for the event.
The supervisor office found that the “institution could have used a less intrusive means of verifying the identity of participants, such as checking passports or ID cards at the entrance to the conference and comparing them with the information submitted online.”
“We also noted that in certain [EU] Member States it is illegal to photocopy passports unless justified by the law,” the report added.
The institution in question also asserted that the registrants consented to have their personal data transferred to the authorities of the EU member state where the conference was being held. But the supervisor office disagreed, concluding that consent had not been given freely because it was a requirement for attending the conference.
The report also details the supervisor office's efforts to prepare for the GDPR, which took effect throughout the EU on May 25, 2018. Wojciech Wiewiórowski, assistant supervisor, said in the report that the office updated its guidance documents, provided training sessions, and held visits and meetings with EU institutions ahead of the GDPR.
The GDPR's enactment spurred the simultaneous creation of the European Data Protection Board, which is composed of 28 EU member state data protection authorities and the supervisor office and oversees the consistent implementation of the GDPR throughout the EU.
Last year, the board adopted 26 opinions, including a new opinion on the European Commission's proposed rule to protect personal data and privacy during the collection of electronic evidence in criminal matters.
While the EU saw major data privacy regulatory changes last year, Buttarelli stated in his report that he “deeply regret[ed]” that the European Commission's draft ePrivacy Regulation had not taken effect alongside the GDPR. The former protects electronic communications while the latter concerns data privacy.
“Only by concluding a new ePrivacy Regulation, which accurately reflects and supports the principles outlined in the GDPR, can we ensure that the fundamental rights of data protection and privacy are fully respected,” Buttarelli wrote.
Read More:
As More Countries Seek Adequacy Decisions With EU, Will US Get Left Behind?
59,000 Data Breaches in EU Since GDPR Took Effect: Report
EU Data Privacy and U.S. Legal Holds: Between a Rock and a Hard Place
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFTC Sues PepsiCo for Alleged Price Break to Big-Box Retailer, Incurs Holyoak's Wrath
5 minute readWells Fargo and Bank of America Agree to Pay Combined $60 Million to Settle SEC Probe
MLB's Texas Rangers Search for a New GC and a Broadcasting Deal
Survey Finds Majority of Legal Professionals Still Intimidated by AI Despite Need to Streamline Mounting Caseloads
Trending Stories
- 1South Florida Attorney Charged With Aggravated Battery After Incident in Prime Rib Line
- 2'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 3Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 4‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 5State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250