The recently agreed Cyber Resilience Act isn’t the only new EU cybersecurity rule set to be published this December: by the end of the year, the European Commission is expected to adopt its draft regulations to establish a European cybersecurity certification scheme (“ECCS”).
Aleksander advises clients on legal problems associated with data protection, cybersecurity, and new technologies. He holds degrees in both law and computer engineering which he combines to provide advice that is both legally sound and technologically pragmatic.
Aleksander has advised companies, governments, and charitable organizations on a range of technology law issues including data breach response, compliance with privacy and cybersecurity laws, and IT contract negotiations. In addition to his experience advising on European law, Aleksander is Australian-qualified and has significant experience advising clients in the Asia-Pacific – particularly on Australian and Hong Kong law.
Yesterday, the European Commission, Council and Parliament announced that they had reached an agreement on the text of the Cyber Resilience Act (“CRA”). As a result, the CRA now looks set to finish its journey through the EU legislative process early next year. As we explained in our prior post about the Commission proposal, the CRA will introduce new cybersecurity obligations for a range of digital products sold in Europe. We’ll provide a more detailed summary of the agreed text once it is finalized and published but in this post we set out a brief summary of key provisions. In terms of timing, the CRA will come into force over a phased transition period starting in late 2025.
Continue Reading The EU’s Cyber Resilience Act Has Now Been Agreed
EU advocate general Collins has reiterated that individuals’ right to claim compensation for harm caused by GDPR breaches requires proof of “actual damage suffered” as a result of the breach, and “clear and precise evidence” of such damage – mere hypothetical harms or discomfort are insufficient. The advocate general also found that unauthorised access to data does not amount to “identity theft” as that term is used in the GDPR.…
On October 26, 2023, the European Court of Justice (“CJEU”) decided that the GDPR grants a patient the right to obtain a copy of his or her medical record free of charge (case C-307/22, FT v DW). As a result, the CJEU held that a provision under German law that permitted doctors to ask their patients to pay for the costs associated with providing access to their medical record is contrary to EU law.…
A would-be technical development could have potentially significant consequences for cloud service providers established outside the EU. The proposed EU Cybersecurity Certification Scheme for Cloud Services (EUCS)—which has been developed by the EU cybersecurity agency ENISA over the past two years and is expected to be adopted by the European Commission as an implementing act in Q1 2024—would, if adopted in its current form, establish certain requirements that could:
- exclude non-EU cloud providers from providing certain (“high” level) services to European companies, and
- preclude EU cloud customers from accessing the services of these non-EU providers.
On August 22, 2023, the Spanish Council of Ministers approved the Statute of the Spanish Agency for the Supervision of Artificial Intelligence (“AESIA”) thus creating the first AI regulatory body in the EU. The AESIA will start operating from December 2023, in anticipation of the upcoming EU AI Act (for a summary of the AI Act, see our EMEA Tech Regulation Toolkit). In line with its National Artificial Intelligence Strategy, Spain has been playing an active role in the development of AI initiatives, including a pilot for the EU’s first AI Regulatory Sandbox and guidelines on AI transparency.
Continue Reading Spain Creates AI Regulator to Enforce the AI Act
As many readers will be aware, the EU’s new cybersecurity directive, NIS2, imposes security, incident notification, and governance obligations on entities in a range of critical sectors, including energy, transport, finance, health, and digital infrastructure (for an overview of NIS2, see our previous post here). One of the main reasons the Commission proposed these new rules was the inconsistent ways in which Member States had implemented requirements under the prior directive, NIS. To help improve harmonization further, the Commission has now issued two guidance documents to help assess when NIS2 or sector-specific requirements apply, and to ensure that registration requirements are consistent across the Union.
Continue Reading European Commission Publishes Guidance on NIS2: Interplay with Sector-Specific Laws
The new EU-wide cyber law, Directive 2022/2555 (NIS2), entered into force on Monday, January 16, 2023. NIS2 builds on the original NIS Directive but significantly expands the categories of organizations that fall within the scope of the law, imposes new and more granular security and incident reporting rules, and creates a stricter enforcement regime. Member states now have until October 18, 2024 to transpose the new directive into their respective national laws.
The passage of NIS2 sets the stage for 2023 to be another big year for cybersecurity in Europe. We expect the global cyber threat landscape to remain challenging and the regulatory landscape to become even more complex due to a raft of new laws including the Cyber Resilience Act (which we covered here), the Critical Entities Resilience Directive (see our post here), the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) (focused on financial services), and the UK’s ongoing reforms to its Network and Information Systems Regulations.
In this blog post, we summarize the key elements of NIS2 and describe what they will mean for your cybersecurity program this year.…
On November 22, 2022, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued its judgment in joint cases C‑37/20 and C‑601/20, holding that provisions of an EU anti-money laundering directive relating to the publication of beneficial ownership registers were incompatible with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (“CFR”). The Court found that while deterring money laundering was a valid objective, making data available to the general public was neither a necessary nor proportionate way to achieve this objective, so contravened the CFR. The judgment demonstrates the Court’s view that sharing a person’s personal data with a third party is a serious intrusion, and that the Court will carefully scrutinize any such sharing.
Although the case concerned the CFR, it sheds light on how the Court approaches similar principles that apply in other contexts, including in the context of the GDPR.…