Privacy & Information Security Law Blog

On June 7, 2024, following a public consultation, the French Data Protection Authority published the final version of the guidelines addressing the development of AI systems from a data protection perspective.

On May 23, 2024, the European Data Protection Board adopted an Opinion on the use of facial recognition technologies by airport operators and airline companies to streamline the passenger flow at airports.

On April 17, 2024, the European Data Protection Board adopted its non-binding Opinion 08/2024 on Valid Consent in the Context of Consent or Pay Models Implemented by Large Online Platforms, stating that such models generally are not compliant with the GDPR, though their use should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

On March 26, 2024, the French data protection authority (the “CNIL”) published the 2024 edition of its Practice Guide for the Security of Personal Data (the “Guide”). The Guide is intended to support organizations in their efforts to implement adequate security measures in compliance with their obligations under Article 32 of the EU General Data Protection Regulation. In particular, the Guide targets DPOs, CISOs, computer scientists and privacy lawyers.

On March 7, 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued its judgment in the case of Endemol Shine (Case C‑740/22). In this case, the CJEU was called upon to assess whether oral disclosure of information could be considered as processing of personal data under the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) and to clarify the relationship between personal data protection and public access to documents.

On March 7, 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued its judgment in the case of IAB Europe (Case C‑604/22). In this judgment, the CJEU assessed the role of the Interactive Advertising Bureau Europe (“IAB Europe”) in the processing operations associated with its Transparency and Consent Framework (“TCF”) and further developed CJEU case law on the concept of personal data under the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”).

On February 20, 2024, The Centre for Information Policy Leadership at Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP  (“CIPL”) and Theodore Christakis, Professor of International, European and Digital Law at University Grenoble Alpes, released a comprehensive study titled The “Zero Risk” Fallacy: International Data Transfers, Foreign Governments’ Access to Data and the Need for a Risk-Based Approach. In the study, Prof. Christakis makes the case that the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and EU law, more generally, allow a more nuanced and risk-based approach to data transfers than the restrictive approach often applied. CIPL and Prof. Christakis provide an approach that outlines data protection measures that are proportionate to the risks at hand, and takes into account the nature of the data, the likelihood of access by foreign governments, and the severity of the potential harm.

On February 8, 2024, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership at Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP (“CIPL”) published a discussion paper on Comparison of U.S. State Privacy Laws: Data Protection Assessments. The paper analyzes the data protection assessment requirements set forth in an ever-growing number of comprehensive U.S. state privacy laws. The paper represents the first deliverable of CIPL’s ongoing project on U.S. state privacy laws, in which CIPL is collaborating with its member organizations to identify areas of alignment and divergence between state privacy laws. The paper also examines the compliance challenges organizations face as a result of the divergences, and provides recommendations to state law and policymakers who may be considering changes to existing laws or the introduction of new ones.

On February 13, 2024, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) adopted Opinion 04/2024 on the notion of the main establishment of a controller in the Union under Article 4(16)(a) of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) (the “Opinion”).

On January 18, 2024, the European Data Protection Board published a thematic one-stop-shop (“OSS”) case digest titled, “Security of Processing and Data Breach Notification” (the “Digest”). The Digest analyzes a selection of decisions adopted by EU data protection authorities on data security and data breaches. 

On January 15, 2024, the European Commission released its “report on the first review of the functioning of the Adequacy Decisions adopted pursuant to Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC” (the “Report”). The Report details the results of the European Commission’s assessment of whether 11 jurisdictions (Andorra, Argentina, Canada, the Faroe Islands, Guernsey, the Isle of Man, Israel, Jersey, New Zealand, Switzerland and Uruguay) that benefit from Adequacy Decisions adopted under the repealed Directive 95/46/EC still offer sufficient guarantees to maintain adequacy status under the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”).

On January 8, 2024, the French Data Protection Authority (the “CNIL”) opened a consultation on its draft guidance for the use of transfer impact assessments (“Guidance”). In describing the Guidance, the CNIL references the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Schrems II and states that exporters relying on tools listed in Article 46(2) and Article 46(3) of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) for personal data transfers are required to assess the level of protection in the designated third country and the need to put in place additional safeguards (i.e., conduct a transfer impact assessment (“TIA”)). The Guidance is intended to assist data exporters in carrying out TIAs. 

On December 21, 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued its judgment in the case of Krankenversicherung Nordrhein (C-667/21) in which it clarified, among other things, the rules for processing special categories of personal data (hereafter “sensitive personal data”) under Article 9 of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) and the nature of the compensation owed for damages under Article 82 of the GDPR.

On December 18, 2023, the updated response from UK Information Commissioner John Edwards to the Data Protection and Digital Information (No 2) Bill (the “Bill”) was published on the website of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). The Commissioner’s original response was published in March 2023. In the latest response, the Commissioner states that he is “pleased to note that government made some changes…in response to my comments,” specifically with regards the definition of “vexatious requests” in respect of requests made to the Information Commissioner’s Office, and the drafting of the changes to the safeguards for processing for research purposes. However, the Commissioner goes on to state that the majority of his comments currently remain unaddressed, including with regards the definition of high risk processing. 

On December 14, 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued its judgment in the case of VB v. Natsionalna agentsia za prihodite (C‑340/21), in which it clarified, among other things, the concept of non-material damage under Article 82 of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) and the rules governing burden of proof under the GDPR.

On December 7, 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) ruled that credit scoring constitutes automated decision-making, which is prohibited under Article 22 of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) unless certain conditions are met. In a case stemming from consumer complaints against German credit bureau SCHUFA, the CJEU found that the company’s reliance on fully automated processes to calculate creditworthiness and extend credit constitutes automated decision-making which produces a legal or similarly significant effect within the meaning of Article 22 of the GDPR.

On November 16, 2023, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) published its Guidelines 2/2023 on the Technical Scope of Art. 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive (the “Guidelines”).

On November 9, 2023, the European Parliament adopted, by a majority of 481 votes in favor, 31 votes against and 71 abstentions, the final text of the Data Act. As explained in our previous blog, the Data Act aims to “ensure fairness in the digital environment, stimulate a competitive data market, open opportunities for data-driven innovation and make data more accessible for all” and was initially proposed by the European Commission on February 23, 2022.

On October 11, 2023, the French Data Protection Authority (the “CNIL”) published a new set of guidelines addressing the research and development of AI systems from a data protection perspective (the “Guidelines”).

On October 17, 2023, The First-tier Tribunal of the UK General Regulatory Chamber allowed an appeal by Clearview AI Inc. (“Clearview”) against an enforcement notice and fine issued by the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”).

On  September 29, 2023, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership at Hunton Andrews Kurth (“CIPL”) released a new paper on its Ten Recommendations for Global AI Regulation. The paper is part of CIPL’s Accountable AI project and follows several earlier contributions including Artificial Intelligence and Data Protection in Tension (October 2018), Hard Issues and Practical Solutions (February 2020), and Artificial Intelligence and Data Protection: How the GDPR Regulates AI (March 2020).

On October 3, 2023, the UK Information Commissioner's Office ("ICO") published new Guidance on lawful monitoring in the workplace, designed to help employees comply with their obligations under the UK General Data Protection Regulation ("UK GDPR") and the Data Protection Act 2018 ("DPA").

On September 21, 2023, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) published an opinion on the UK Government’s assessment of adequacy for the UK Extension to the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework (the “UK Extension”). The ICO provides that, while it is reasonable for the Secretary of State to conclude that the UK Extension provides an adequate level of data protection and lay regulations to that effect, there are four specific areas that could pose risks to UK data subjects if the protections identified are not properly applied. These four risks are: 

On September 15, 2023, the Irish Data Protection Commission (the “DPC”) announced a fine of 345 million Euros against TikTok Technology Limited (“TikTok”) for non-compliance with GDPR rules regarding the processing of personal data of child users. This decision by the DPC reflects the binding decision of the European Data Protection Board (the “EDPB”) pursuant to Article 65 of the GDPR.

On July 19, 2023, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) issued an Information Note regarding data transfers to the U.S. following the adoption of an adequacy decision on the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework (the “Data Privacy Framework”) on July 10, 2023 (the “Information Note”).

On July 14, 2023, the Norwegian Data Protection Authority (“DPA”) ordered Meta Platforms Ireland Limited and Facebook Norway AS (jointly, “Meta”) to temporarily cease the processing of personal data of data subjects in Norway for the purpose of targeting ads on the basis of “observed behavior,” when relying on either the contractual necessity legal basis (Article 6(1)b)) or the legitimate interests legal basis (Article 6(1)(f)) of the GDPR.

Pablo A. Palazzi from Allende & Brea in Argentina reports that on June 30, 2023, the Argentine Executive Branch sent the new proposed Personal Data Protection Bill (the “Bill”) to the National Congress for consideration. The Bill was drafted by the Argentine Data Protection Authority (Agencia de Acceso a la Información Pública, or “AAIP”) and seeks to amend the current Personal Data Protection Act (Law No. 25,326 of 2000).

On July 4, 2023, the European Commission proposed a new Regulation for additional procedural rules relating to the enforcement of the GDPR (the “GDPR Enforcement Regulation”). With the GDPR Enforcement Regulation, the European Commission aims to make the handling of cross-border data protection cases more efficient by harmonizing certain administrative procedures and elaborating existing rules on cooperation between EU Supervisory Authorities.

On June 30, 2023, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) published Recommendations 1/2022 on the Application for Approval and on the elements and principles to be found in Controller Binding Corporate Rules (Art. 47 GDPR) (the “Recommendations”), which were adopted on June 20, 2023. Binding corporate rules (“BCRs”) are a mechanism for transferring personal data to third countries in accordance with Chapter V of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), and must be approved by the relevant organization’s lead supervisory authority. BCRs create enforceable rights and set out commitments in order to create, for the personal data transferred under the BCRs, a level of protection essentially equivalent to that provided by the GDPR.

On June 27, 2023, the Council and the European Parliament reached a Political Agreement (“Political Agreement”) on the Proposal for a Regulation on harmonized rules on fair access to and use of data (the “Data Act”). The Data Act aims to “ensure fairness in the digital environment, stimulate a competitive data market, open opportunities for data-driven innovation and make data more accessible for all” and was initially proposed by the European Commission on February 23, 2022.

On June 14, 2023, the European Parliament (“EP”) approved its negotiating mandate (the “EP’s Position”) regarding the EU’s Proposal for a Regulation laying down harmonized rules on Artificial Intelligence (the “AI Act”). The vote in the EP means that EU institutions may now begin trilogue negotiations (the Council approved its negotiating mandate on December 2022). The final version of the AI Act is expected before the end of 2023.

On June 7, 2023, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) adopted the final version of its Guidelines on the calculation of administrative fines under the GDPR (the “Guidelines”). Through the Guidelines, the EDPB intends to harmonize the methodology used by supervisory authorities (“SA”) to calculate fines.

On May 23, 2023, the UK Information Commissioner, John Edwards, delivered the opening remarks at the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (“LIBE”). The Commissioner opened his speech by stating his “principal reason” for being present was to provide “reassurance” that he takes his “responsibility of protecting Europeans data in the United Kingdom very seriously” and “will continue to do so through the process of law reform, and beyond.” The Commissioner went on to discuss several points, including the following:

On May 22, 2023, the Irish Data Protection Commission (the “DPC”) announced a €1.2 billion fine against Meta Ireland for unlawfully transferring personal data to the U.S.

On May 4, 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued a judgment in the Österreichische Post case (C-300/21). In the decision, the CJEU clarified that a mere infringement of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) is not sufficient to give data subjects the right to receive compensation under Article 82 of the GDPR. Article 82 provides that “any person who has suffered material or non-material damage as a result of an infringement of this Regulation shall have the right to receive compensation from the controller or processor for the damage suffered.”

On March 28, 2023, the French Data Protection Authority (the “CNIL” or “French DPA”) announced a €125,000 fine on the e-scooter rental company Cityscoot for breaching EU and French data protection rules, in particular in the context of geolocation and use of Google reCAPTCHA. The fine was imposed on March 16, 2023.

On March 29, 2023, the UK government published a white paper on artificial intelligence (“AI”) entitled “A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation.” The white paper sets out a new “flexible” approach to regulating artificial intelligence which is intended to build public trust in AI and make it easier for businesses to grow and create jobs. 

This is an excerpt from Centre for Information Policy Leadership (“CIPL”) President Bojana Bellamy’s recently published piece in the IAPP “Privacy Perspectives” blog, and are the views of the author.

On March 8, 2023, the UK Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, Michelle Donelan, introduced the Data Protection and Digital Information (No. 2) Bill to UK Parliament. The first version of the reform bill was originally proposed by the UK government in July 2022, but was put on pause during September 2022. 

On March 7, 2023, the Irish Data Protection Commission (“DPC”) published its Annual Report for 2022 (the “Report”). The Report contains details on several areas of the DPC’s work, including complaints from data subjects received by the DPC, personal data breach notifications received by the DPC and statutory inquiries conducted by the DPC.

On February 24, 2023, following public consultation, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) published the following three sets of adopted guidelines:

1. Guidelines on the Interplay between the application of Article 3 and the provisions on international transfers as per Chapter V GDPR (05/2021) (final version);
2. Guidelines on certification as a tool for transfers (07/2022) (final version); and
3. Guidelines on deceptive design patterns in social media platform interfaces (03/2022) (final version).

On February 20, 2023, in the case of Experian Limited v The Information Commissioner, the First-Tier Tribunal in the UK (the “Tribunal”) ruled on the ICO’s action to require Experian to make changes to how it processes personal data for direct marketing purposes. While the Tribunal supported the ICO in certain respects, it largely ruled in favor of Experian and issued a Substituted Decision Notice, as detailed further below.

On February 9, 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued its judgment in the X-FAB Dresden case (C-453/21). In this decision, the CJEU clarified the criteria for assessing whether a conflict of interest exists between the Data Protection Officer (“DPO”) position, and other tasks or duties assigned to the DPO.

On January 18, 2023, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) published its Report on the work undertaken by the Cookie Banner Taskforce (the “Report”).

On January 4, 2023, the Irish Data Protection Commission (“DPC”) announced the conclusion of two inquiries into the data processing practices of Meta Platforms, Inc. (“Meta”) with respect to the company’s Instagram and Facebook platforms. As a result of the investigations, the DPC fined Meta a combined €390 million for breaches of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) and, following consultation with the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”), notably held that Meta can no longer rely on the GDPR’s “performance of a contract” legal basis for processing personal data in the behavioral advertising context, a decision that has broad implications for publishers engaged in behavioral advertising in the EU.

On January 10, 2023, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership (“CIPL”) at Hunton Andrews Kurth  responded to a call for public comments from the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) regarding their Recommendations 1/2022 on the Application for Approval and on the elements and principles to be found in Controller Binding Corporate Rules (Art. 47 GDPR) (“Recommendations 1/2022”). The Recommendations 1/2022 are intended to bring existing Controller Binding Corporate Rules (“BCR-C”) in line with the GDPR and the Schrems II ruling.

On January 11, 2023, the Belgian Data Protection Authority (“Belgian DPA”) announced that it has approved the Interactive Advertising Bureau Europe’s (“IAB Europe”) action plan with respect to its Transparency and Consent Framework (“TCF”).

On December 29, 2022, the French Data Protection Authority (the “CNIL”) announced that it imposed an €8,000,000 fine on Apple for violations of the French rules on targeted advertising and the use of cookies and similar tracking technologies.

On December 13, 2022, the European Commission launched the process for the adoption of an adequacy decision for the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework. If adopted, the long-awaited adequacy decision will provide EU companies transferring personal data to the U.S. with an additional mechanism to legitimize their transfers.

An adequacy decision would foster trans-Atlantic data flows and address the concerns raised by the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) judgment in the Schrems II case.

On November 25, 2022, Ireland’s Data Protection Commission (“DPC”) released a decision fining Meta Platforms, Inc. (“Meta”) €265 million for a 2019 data leak involving the personal information of approximately 533 million Facebook users worldwide.

The UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) recently published a package of detailed guidance and checklists for direct marketing activities. The ICO’s new webpage on direct marketing now includes various resources, including specific guidance for SMEs, business-to-business marketing, and organizations using the marketing services of data brokers, as well as direct marketing FAQs and checklists, and a training module for businesses.

On November 23, 2022, the UK government’s Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (“DCMS”) announced that it had completed its assessment of South Korea’s personal data legislation, and concluded that sufficiently strong privacy laws are in place to protect UK personal data transferred to South Korea while upholding the rights and protections of UK citizens.

On November 17, 2022, the UK data protection regulator, the Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”), published updated guidance on international transfers that includes a new section on transfer risk assessments (“TRAs”) and a TRA tool.

In its statement regarding the updated guidance, the ICO describes the TRA guidance as “an alternative approach to the one put forward by the European Data Protection Board” and says its aim is “to find an alternative, achievable approach delivering the right protection for the people the data is about, whilst ensuring that the assessment is reasonable and proportionate.”

SHIFT Counsellors at Law reports from Indonesia that The People’s Representative Council of the Republic of Indonesia has ratified Indonesia’s draft law on personal data protection. The draft law came into effect on October 17, 2022. The law, which is partly modeled on the EU General Data Protection Regulation, is Indonesia’s first “umbrella regulation” on personal data protection. The law will provide certain protections to Indonesian citizens’ data, and provide more legal certainty to parties processing such data.

Read SHIFT Counsellors’ article on the ...

On October 24, 2022, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) issued a £4.4 million fine to Interserve Group Limited for failing to keep employee personal data secure, which violates Article 5(1)(f) and Article 32 of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), during the period of March 2019 to December 2020. The ICO determined that such violations rendered Interserve vulnerable to the cyber attack which took place between March 2020 and May 2020, affecting the personal data of up to 113,000 Interserve employees. The compromised data included contact details, national insurance numbers and bank account details, as well as special category data, including ethnic origin, religion, details of any disabilities, sexual orientation and health information.

On October 17, 2022, the French Data Protection Authority (the “CNIL”) imposed a €20 million fine on Clearview AI for unlawful use of facial recognition technology. The fine was imposed after the CNIL’s prior formal notice remained unaddressed by Clearview AI.

On October 12, 2022, the UK Information Commissioner's Office (“ICO”) launched a public consultation on its draft guidance on employers’ obligations when monitoring at work (“Draft Guidance”). In addition, the ICO has published an impact scoping document, which outlines some of the context and potential impacts of the Draft Guidance (“Impact Scoping Document”).

On October 7, 2022, President Biden signed Executive Order on Enhancing Safeguards for United States Signals Intelligence Activities, which provides a new framework for legal data transfers between the European Union and the United States. The legal basis for transatlantic data transfers has been uncertain since 2020, when the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) declared the previous framework, the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, invalid under EU law. 

On September 21, 2022, Denmark’s data protection authority Datatilsynet (“Danish DPA”) announced its guidance that Google Analytics, Google’s audience measurement tool, is not compliant with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), as the tool transfers personal data to the United States which, following Schrems II, does not offer an adequate level of data protection.

On September 5, 2022, the Irish Data Protection Commissioner (the “DPC”) imposed a €405,000,000 fine on Instagram (a Meta-owned social media platform) for violations of the EU General Data Protection Regulation’s (“GDPR’s”) rules on the processing of children’s personal data.

On August 5, 2022, French AdTech company Criteo announced that it had received a report from the French Data Protection Authority (“CNIL”) on August 3, 2022, claiming various infringements of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) and proposing to impose a €60,000,000 fine against Criteo. The proposed fine follows complaints filed by privacy NGO ‘Privacy International’ against Criteo.

On July 7, 2022, the Irish Data Protection Commission (the “DPC”) sent a draft decision to other EU data protection authorities, proposing to block Meta’s transfers of personal data from the EU to the United States.

On June 23, 2022, Italy’s data protection authority (the “Garante”) determined that a website’s use of the audience measurement tool Google Analytics is not compliant with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), as the tool transfers personal data to the United States, which does not offer an adequate level of data protection. In making this determination, the Garante joins other EU data protection authorities, including the French and Austrian regulators, that also have found use of the tool to be unlawful.

On June 16, 2022, Industry Minister François-Philippe Champagne and Justice Minister David Lametti introduced the Digital Charter Implementation Act, 2022 (Bill C-27), a bill that would overhaul Canada’s existing legal framework for personal information protection in the private sector. In the Canadian government’s news release, Industry Minister Champagne stated that Bill C-27, if enacted, will “give businesses clear rules to support their efforts to innovate with data and will introduce a new regulatory framework for the responsible development of artificial intelligence systems, while recognizing the need to protect young people and their information.” Bill C-27 is similar to former Bill C-11, which died in the 2021 legislative session. 

On May 12, 2022, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) adopted Guidelines 04/2022 on the calculation of administrative fines under the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) (the “Guidelines”). The Guidelines are intended  to harmonize the methodology supervisory authorities (“SAs”) use when calculating the amount of a GDPR fine and provide illustrative examples to help organizations understand the calculation method.

On June 1, 2022, Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (“PDPA”) entered into force after three years of delays. The PDPA, originally enacted in May 2019, provides for a one-year grace period, with the main operative provisions of the law originally set to come into force in 2020. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, however, the Thai government issued royal decrees to extend the compliance deadline to June 1, 2022. 

On May 10, 2022, as part of the Queen’s Speech, the UK government announced its intention to introduce a Data Reform Bill (the “Bill”). The UK government’s background and briefing notes to the Queen’s Speech state that the purpose of the Bill is to “take advantage of the benefits of Brexit to create a world class data rights regime…that reduces burdens on businesses, boosts the economy, helps scientists to innovate and improves the lives of people in the UK.”

On April 23, 2022, the European Commission announced that the European Parliament and EU Member States had reached consensus on the Digital Services Act (“DSA”), which establishes accountability standards for online platforms regarding illegal and harmful content.

On April 12, 2022, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser made remarks at the International Association of Privacy Professionals Global Privacy Summit in Washington, D.C., where he invited stakeholders to provide informal public comments on the Colorado Privacy Act (“CPA”) rulemaking.

On March 24, 2022, the European Union unveiled the final text of the Digital Markets Act (the “DMA”). The final text of the DMA was reached following trilogue negotiations between the European Commission, European Parliament and EU Member States (led by the French Presidency at the European Council). The final text retains essentially the same features as the previous draft text but does include some notable changes.

On February 22, 2022, the European Data Protection Board (the “EDPB”) adopted its final Guidelines 04/2021 on Codes of Conduct as tools for transfers (the “Guidelines”), following a public consultation that took place in 2021.

On March 16, 2022, Google announced the launch of its new analytics solution, “Google Analytics 4.” Google Analytics 4 aims, among other things, to address recent developments in the EU regarding the use of analytics cookies and data transfers resulting from such use.

On February 23, 2022, the European Commission adopted a Proposal for a Regulation designed to harmonize rules on the fair access to and use of data generated in the EU across all economic sectors (the “Data Act”). The Data Act is intended to “ensure fairness in the digital environment, stimulate a competitive data market, open opportunities for data-driven innovation and make data more accessible for all.” Importantly, the Data Act applies to all data generated in the EU, not only personal data, which is regulated by the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”).

On February 15, 2022, the French Data Protection Authority (the “CNIL”) published its enforcement priority topics for 2022. Each year, the CNIL conducts numerous investigations in response to complaints, data breach notifications and ongoing events, or based on previously established enforcement priorities.

On February 10, 2022, the French Data Protection Authority (the “CNIL”) ruled the transfer of EU personal data from the EU to the U.S. through the use of the Google Analytics cookie to be unlawful. In its decision, the CNIL held that an organization using Google Analytics was in violation of the GDPR’s data transfer requirements. The CNIL ordered the organization to comply with the GDPR, and to stop using Google Analytics, if necessary.

On February 2, 2022, the Litigation Chamber of the Belgian Data Protection Authority (the “Belgian DPA”) imposed a €250,000 fine against the Interactive Advertising Bureau Europe (“IAB Europe”) for several alleged infringements of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (the “GDPR”), following an investigation into IAB Europe Transparency and Consent Framework (“TCF”).

On February 2, 2022, the Secretary of State placed the UK Information Commissioner’s Office's (“ICO's ”) final international data transfer agreement (“IDTA”) and international data transfer addendum to the European Commission’s standard contractual clauses (“SCCs”) for international data transfers (“Addendum”) before the European Parliament. The IDTA and Addendum are set to come into force on March 21, 2022, but the ICO advises that they are of use to organizations immediately. The ICO also has stated that it intends to publish additional guidance on use of the IDTA and Addendum.

View the ICO’s final drafts of the IDTA and Addendum.

The Austrian data protection authority (the “Austrian DPA”) recently published a decision in a case brought against an Austrian website provider and Google by the non-governmental organization co-founded by privacy activist Max Schrems, None of Your Business (“NOYB”). The Austrian DPA ruled that the use of Google Analytics cookies by the website operator violates both Chapter V of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), which establishes rules on international data transfers, and the Schrems II judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

On January 12, 2022, the French Data Protection Authority (the “CNIL”) published guidelines on the re-use of personal data by data processors for their own purposes (such as product improvement or the development of new products and services) under the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) (the “Guidelines”). This post outlines key takeaways from the Guidelines.

On December 31, 2021, the French Data Protection Authority (the “CNIL”) imposed a €150,000,000 fine on Google and a €60,000,000 fine on Facebook (now Meta) for violations of French rules on the use of cookies.

In a letter addressed to certain members of the European Parliament (“MEPs”), European Commissioner for Justice Reynders refuted some of the criticism that has been raised against the Irish Data Protection Commissioner (“DPC”).

Last month, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership (“CIPL”) at Hunton Andrews Kurth submitted a response to the UK Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (“DCMS”) on its Consultation on Reforms to the Data Protection Regime (the “Response”). The Response also reflects views gathered from CIPL members during two industry roundtables organized in collaboration with DCMS to obtain feedback on the reform proposals. Key takeaways from the Response include the following:

On December 6, 2021, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership (“CIPL”) at Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP published a white paper on “Bridging the DMA and the GDPR – Comments by the Centre for Information Policy Leadership on the Data Protection Implications of the Draft Digital Markets Act” (the “White Paper”).

On November 19, 2021, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) published its draft Guidelines 05/2021 (the “Guidelines”) on the interplay between the application of Article 3 of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), which sets forth the GDPR’s territorial scope, and the GDPR’s provisions on international data transfers. The Guidelines aim to assist organizations subject to the GDPR in identifying whether a data processing activity constitutes an international data transfer under the GDPR, as the GDPR does not define the term.

On November 5, 2021, IAB Europe (“IAB EU”) announced that, in the coming weeks, the Belgian Data Protection Authority plans to share with other data protection authorities a draft ruling on the IAB EU Transparency & Consent Framework (“TCF”). The TCF is a GDPR consent solution built by IAB EU that has become a widely used approach to collecting consent to cookies under the GDPR. The draft ruling is expected to find that the TCF does not comply with the GDPR, in part because IAB EU acts as a controller, and the digital signals the TCF creates to capture individuals’ consent to cookies are personal data under the GDPR. Because IAB EU does not consider itself a controller with respect to the TCF, it does not currently comply with the GDPR’s controller obligations.

On November 10, 2021, the UK Supreme Court issued its long-awaited judgment in the Lloyd v Google case. The decision is expected to make it difficult in practice for a future class action lawsuit that is brought on behalf of a class of individuals who have not actively opted in to being represented by the lead claimant to proceed under UK law.

On October 13, 2021, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) adopted Guidelines 10/2020 on restrictions under Article 23 of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) (the “Guidelines”) following public consultation. Article 23 of the GDPR permits EU Member States to impose restrictions on data subject rights as long as the restrictions respect the essence of the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals, and are necessary and proportionate measures in a democratic society to safeguard, for example, national security, defense or public security. The data subject rights to which the restrictions may apply are those set out in Articles 12-22 (e.g., rights of access, erasure), Article 34 (communication of a data breach to individuals) and Article 5 (the data processing principles) to the extent that its provisions correspond to data subject rights.

On September 29, 2021, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership (“CIPL”) at Hunton Andrews Kurth published a paper on the Draft ePrivacy Regulation (“ePR”), in the context of the Trilogue Discussions between the EU Commission, EU Council and EU Parliament (the “Paper”).

The Irish Data Protection Commissioner (“DPC”) has submitted a draft decision on Facebook Ireland Limited’s (“Facebook”) data protection compliance to other European regulators under the cooperation mechanism of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) (the “Draft Decision”). The DPC proposes a fine between €28 and €36 million (i.e., up to $42 million) for infringements of the transparency obligations under the GDPR, specifically with respect to the legal basis upon which Facebook relied. In addition, the Draft Decision proposes imposing an order on Facebook to bring its terms of service and Data Policy into compliance within three months. However, the DPC indicates in its Draft Decision that Facebook is permitted to rely on contractual necessity as a legal basis for its personalized advertising, taking the view that this constitutes a core element of Facebook’s service.

On October 12, 2021, the Oxford County Court determined that a homeowner had breached the Data Protection Act 2018 (“DPA”) and UK General Data Protection Regulation (“UK GDPR”) by using Ring security cameras around his property. In Dr Mary Fairhurst v Mr Jon Woodard, Fairhurst claimed harassment, nuisance and breach of UK data protection law based on her former neighbor, Woodard’s, use of security cameras and lights around his property. While the claim in nuisance failed, the judge found for the claimant on the claims of harassment and breach of data protection law.

On September 27, 2021, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership (“CIPL”) at Hunton Andrews Kurth published a white paper on the “GDPR Enforcement Cooperation and the One-Stop-Shop (“OSS”) - Learning from the First Three Years” (the “Paper”). The Paper identifies the challenges faced by the OSS, defines CIPL’s position, and proposes possible solutions to improve the OSS mechanism, taking into account the European Data Protection Board’s (“EDPB”) recent work and decisions by the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”).

On September 27, 2021, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) announced that it had adopted an opinion on the European Commission’s draft adequacy decision for the Republic of Korea (the “Opinion”).

On September 10, 2021, the UK Government Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (“DCMS”) launched a consultation on its proposed reforms to the UK data protection regime. The consultation reflects DCMS’s effort to deliver on Mission 2 of the National Data Strategy, which is “to secure a pro-growth and trusted data regime in the UK.” Organizations are encouraged to provide input on a range of data protection proposals, some of which are outlined below. The consultation will close on November 19, 2021, and the Centre for Information Policy Leadership (“CIPL”) will consult with members to prepare a formal response to the consultation.

On August 19, 2021, the Belgian Council of State confirmed a decision of the regional Flemish Authorities to contract with an EU branch of a U.S. company using Amazon Web Services (“AWS”).

On August 27, 2021, the Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (“Swiss DPA”) announced that the new EU Standard Contractual Clauses (the “SCCs”) may be relied on to legitimize transfers of personal data from Switzerland to countries without an adequate level of data protection, provided that the necessary amendments and adaptations are made for use under Swiss data protection law.

On September 2, 2021, Ireland’s Data Protection Commission (“DPC”) announced a fine of €225 million ($266 million) against WhatsApp Ireland Ltd (“WhatsApp”) for failure to meet the transparency requirements of Articles 12-14 of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”). This fine represents a more than four-fold increase in the €30-50 million fine that was proposed in a draft decision issued by the DPC in December 2020. Due to the cross-border nature of WhatsApp’s data processing activities, the DPC’s draft decision was reviewed by other relevant supervisory authorities, as required by the cooperation and consistency mechanism under Chapter VII of the GDPR. Eight other EU regulators objected to the DPC’s draft decision. Their objections were referred to the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”), in accordance with the dispute resolution procedure under Article 65(1)(a) of the GDPR, after the DPC failed to reach a consensus with the objecting regulators.

On August 19, 2021, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) approved the criteria for three certification schemes, as required under Article 42(5) of the UK General Data Protection Regulation (“UK GDPR”). Certification schemes are one method for organizations to demonstrate compliance with the UK GDPR.

On August 12, 2021, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) published a call for views on data protection and employment practices. The ICO intends to update its employment practices code and associated guidance, originally produced under the Data Protection Act 1998, which has now been replaced by the UK General Data Protection Regulation (“UK GDPR”) and Data Protection Act 2018 (“DPA 2018”). The ICO is requesting responses from large and small employers, workers, volunteers, trades unions, employment dispute resolution bodies, recruitment agencies, professional and trade bodies, and suppliers of employment technology solutions.

On August 26, 2021, the UK Department of Culture, Media and Sport (“DCMS”) made news by publishing a document indicating its intent to begin making adequacy decisions for UK data transfers to foreign jurisdictions and by announcing its preferred candidate for the position of new UK Information Commissioner.