Facebook Data Case: EU's Top Court Quashes US-EU 'Privacy Shield'
Lawyers have said the ruling could mean that around 5,000 U.S. companies signed up to the Privacy Shield will have to find an interim solution until EU and U.S. officials have worked out a new data protection deal.
July 16, 2020 at 06:36 AM
3 minute read
In a mixed-bag judgment delivered on Thursday, Europe's highest court gave its blessing to the mechanisms used by companies to transfer European personal data around the world but struck down a major data protection deal agreed between the U.S. and the EU just four years ago, known as the Privacy Shield.
The judgment handed down by the European Court of Justice – which brings a layer of finality to the long running wrangle between Facebook and Austrian activist Max Schrems – means that companies like Facebook can continue to lawfully transfer European customer data to other parts of the world.
EU and U.S. authorities, however, have essentially been tasked by the Luxembourg-based court with drawing up a new data protection deal at a time when transatlantic relations are already strained.
The judges ruled that the so-called 'standard contractual clauses' that legally underpin companies' transfers of personal data outside the 27-member bloc do not violate EU law. The court instead took issue with the Privacy Shield agreed between the U.S. and the EU in 2016, arguing that it does not offer European residents recourse to an independent body that offers the guarantees granted by the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and that can take decisions that would be binding on U.S. intelligence services.
The Privacy Shield was adopted by the U.S. and the EU after the European court struck down its predecessor, the Safe Harbour agreement, following a 2013 complaint brought by the Austrian privacy activist Max Schrems.
The case decided on Thursday stems from another challenge brought by Schrems before Ireland's Hight Court, where Facebook's European headquarters are located.
Schrems, a Facebook user since 2008, contends in his complaint that the U.S. does not sufficiently protect the personal data of European citizens transferred to the country. The case made it to the Luxembourg-based after the Irish court decided to seek guidance on the interpretation of the GDPR and the validity of the Privacy Shield in a preliminary ruling request.
Lisa Peets, partner at Covington & Burling's office, said that the judgment means that the 5,000 or so U.S. companies signed up to the Privacy Shield will have to find an interim solution until EU and U.S. officials have worked out a new data protection deal.
"The invalidation of the Privacy Shield will keep data protection lawyers busy as clients consider the impact of the judgment and the need for alternate transfer mechanisms," she said in a written statement.
Peets added that the court's finding that the standard contract clauses are legally sound would nonetheless be welcomed by many businesses. "This will be a huge relief to companies across Europe," she said.
The European Commission, Max Schrems and Facebook did not respond to requests for comment.
|Read More
Facebook's Data Transfer from EU to US is Legal, Top EU Court Adviser Says
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 AllThe SLAPP Heard Around the World: SDT Hearing Draws Industry Attention
5 minute readCMS Wistrand Hires Former Linklaters Nordics MP and Bird & Bird's Danish Hire
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1US to pay nearly $116M to settle lawsuits over rampant sexual abuse at California women's prison
- 2Ex-Red Robin CLO Joins Norton Rose Fulbright After Helping Sell Latest Employer for $4.9 Billion
- 3Watch Your Pronouns
- 4Burford Sets Sights on UAE’s Surge in Construction & Disputes
- 5Santa Barbara Judge Accused of Moonlighting as Attorney for Secretary/Girlfriend
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