4 Tips for an Effective E-discovery Plan in China
Unsure about China's regulatory environment? These tips can help navigate legal challenges that affect cross-border data collection.
September 18, 2018 at 05:00 AM
6 minute read
Collecting data in China for cross-border litigation or investigations can pose challenging legal and regulatory issues for multinational companies. Whether conducting internal investigations, responding to litigation or U.S. regulatory inquiries, or supporting audits or due diligence reviews, the process of collecting, preserving and transferring data has been complicated by a web of recent enforcement actions, new laws and regulations, as well as geopolitical uncertainties.
Given this dynamic regulatory environment, to ensure that any data collection in China is conducted successfully and without regulatory scrutiny, it is critical to map out a timely and well-documented e-discovery plan that comprehensively addresses compliance with local laws. Having such a process in place can also go a long way to address potential post-collection inquiries.
Below we set out a number of recommendations for mapping out a China e-discovery plan in light of these considerations.
1. Determine the scope of the discovery exercise
Having a clear grasp of the scope of the exercise is fundamental before you consider the legal and regulatory issues that may affect your collection. This includes understanding and identifying the different types of data involved, including:
- Whether the data resides on company premises or elsewhere (eg, third-party data centers);
- Whether the data-containing devices are company or employee-owned;
- Whether the data is encrypted; and
- The specific file types involved.
Additionally, with the widespread adoption of smartphones and social media apps (including a very popular messaging app in China called WeChat), a new set of potentially in-scope data has emerged, which includes business communications residing outside of traditional desktop email collections as well as machine data (eg, metadata, smart and connected devices). This has become increasingly relevant in litigation involving the transfer of intellectual property, financial fraud and other business disputes.
After considering what types of data are involved, you will need to better understand how that data will be used including determining whether the data would need to be transferred to third parties (e.g. professional advisers, group headquarters or a regulator), transferred abroad, or reviewed for internal purposes only.
2. Understand the use of personal data and other regulated data in China
Data protection is becoming more complex in China. As a result of more stringent laws and regulations, many companies have had to revisit their China data policies and obtain consent prior to the collection, use, or disclosure of personal data. Collection in China is further complicated by recent trends towards “data localization”—ie, certain data having to remain in mainland China. Given the rapidly-evolving regulatory environment, it is important to keep abreast of recent developments, plan ahead and understand your data.
Will you need to consider personal data?
In China, personal data is defined as including all kinds of information, recorded electronically or through other means, that, whether taken alone or combined with other information, is sufficient to identify a natural person's information. This includes but is not limited to a person's name, contact details, photographs, health information, personnel file, and banking/payment information.
Sensitive personal data has a very different meaning in China than in most other countries. It means personal data which, if disclosed or abused, will lead to an adverse impact on the data subject. Examples of sensitive personal data in China include mobile phone numbers, login information and web browsing data.
Individuals must be properly notified and provide their express consent prior to any attempt to collect, use or disclose their personal data. Explicit consent is required for sensitive personal data and overseas data transfers. In China, the requirement to obtain consent can be very difficult to manage in practice at the time an investigation arises since China's data protection laws and regulations, unlike those in other jurisdictions, do not contain comprehensive exemptions to the consent requirement in the context of investigations, litigation or due diligence.
Additional compliance hurdles, such as impact assessments, may also need to be addressed in parallel with the investigation if external advisers or overseas data transfers are to be involved.
Other regulated data
Some other (non-personal) categories of data are also heavily regulated in China. Such data should only be collected, transferred, exported overseas and/or reviewed with careful consideration and planning.
Some of the key data categories include:
- “State secrets” as outlined under the PRC Guarding State Secrets Law;
- “Important data” as outlined under the PRC Cybersecurity Law; and
- Data in certain regulated sectors such as banking, healthcare, securities, scientific and insurance.
If your data scope contains any of the above types of data, caution must be exercised to ensure that the data collection process can either exclude the data or address the legal concerns in an appropriate and compliant manner. Failure to do so could result in civil or criminal liability, including fines, sanctions, revocation of license, detention and/or imprisonment.
3. Plan your review process
The next key step is to determine the most effective process to collect and review the data. The review process should be conducted in an efficient and cost-effective manner, and in compliance with applicable laws. Common factors to consider may include:
- Where the review would take place;
- The type of platform to host the review; and
- Whether to use local or global resources.
For bilingual and Chinese documents, it may be prudent to bring in bilingual attorneys and translators to address review tasks. You may also consider engaging an experienced forensic technology professional to assist with the data collection and hosting. This becomes increasingly important for larger and/or more complex data sets.
4. Other issues
When investigations or inquiries relate to foreign regulatory bodies residing outside of China, there is a heightened risk of miscommunication and misinformation. This may impede the collection process, or even cause further legal or discovery complications. An experienced counsel who has seen it all would be invaluable in helping map out strategy, avoid common pitfalls and mitigate risks.
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 AllTrending Stories
- 15th Circuit Considers Challenge to Louisiana's Ten Commandments Law
- 2Crocs Accused of Padding Revenue With Channel-Stuffing HEYDUDE Shoes
- 3E-discovery Practitioners Are Racing to Adapt to Social Media’s Evolving Landscape
- 4The Law Firm Disrupted: For Office Policies, Big Law Has Its Ear to the Market, Not to Trump
- 5FTC Finalizes Child Online Privacy Rule Updates, But Ferguson Eyes Further Changes
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