Larger GDPR Fines Are on the Way, Privacy Experts Say
As companies have to grapple with different regulations concerning data privacy, they also need to expect that European regulators will dole out higher fines on companies that violate the GDPR.
May 16, 2019 at 06:44 PM
3 minute read
Just shy of one year into the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, companies and their legal departments should double-check they are keeping up with the law or face fines and other punishments, according to experts.
The GDPR was implemented May 25, 2018, and in the first year fines were not as large as anticipated.
Todd Marlin, a principal and forensic data analytics and data science leader at Ernst & Young, said the average fine has been approximately 70,000 euros. He would also expect the fines to grow in size as time goes on.
"The largest fine has been 50 million euros, which is pretty small considering the regulation's standards," Marlin said.
The smaller fines are a result of an unofficial grace period from European regulators, said Odia Kagan, a partner a Fox Rothschild in Philadelphia and chair of the firm's GDPR compliance and international privacy practice.
Kagan said larger fines and other punishments are coming.
"The regulators that were interviewed prior to the implementation of GDPR have said they're not going to enforce the new obligations right away," Kagan said.
Kagan said, however, bigger fines are coming. She said it takes time to go through the process of finalizing those large fines. In January, Google was slapped with a $57 million fine from the French regulator. It took some time for the regulator to investigate the complaint and issue a fine considering the complaint against Google was among the first made when the GDPR was implemented.
The fines are not the worst kind of punishment European regulators can enforce on a company. Kagan said if regulators are notified about a breach and find companies did not do enough to protect the data, they can tell a company it has 90 days to remedy the situation or the company faces not being able to use the data that it collects.
"Companies can just pay the fine because they make more money than the fine," Kagan said. "If they're told they can't use the data; that is big."
Going forward, European regulators will want to see continued compliance rather than just having boxes checked, Kagan said.
One of the ongoing challenges is that corporations will have to remain compliant with the GDPR while focusing on new privacy regulations from different jurisdictions.
Marlin said companies have to decide how to proceed. Whether they want to remain compliant with just the GDPR may make sense in the immediate future, but is not a good long-term plan. Data protection, Marlin said, has become more than just a legal issue.
"It is an ongoing business process. Data never sleeps," Marlin said. "More and more jurisdictions are coming out with privacy statutes."
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
© 2024 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 AllHealth Care Giants Sue FTC, Allege Lina Khan Using Loaded Process to Vilify Pharmacy Benefit Managers
3 minute readPorsche's Venture Capital Arm Adds General Counsel From Clifford Chance
How a 200,000-Worker Global Enterprise Took Down the Silos and Made ESG Its Mission
4 minute readCorporate Counsel's 2024 Award Winners Performed Legal Wizardry, Gave a Hand Up to Others
Trending Stories
- 1Why Is It Becoming More Difficult for Businesses to Mandate Arbitration of Employment Disputes?
- 2The Whys and Hows of a Mediator’s Proposal
- 3Litigators of the Week: A Trade Secret Win at the ITC for Viking Over Promising Potential Liver Drug
- 4Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 5'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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