Photo of Anna Oberschelp de Meneses

Anna Sophia Oberschelp de Meneses is an associate in the Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group.  Anna is a qualified Portuguese lawyer, but is both a native Portuguese and German speaker.  Anna advises companies on European data protection law and helps clients coordinate international data protection law projects.  She has obtained a certificate for "corporate data protection officer" by the German Association for Data Protection and Data Security ("Gesellschaft für Datenschutz und Datensicherheit e.V."). She is also Certified Information Privacy Professional Europe (CIPPE/EU) by the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP).  Anna also advises companies in the field of EU consumer law and has been closely tracking the developments in this area.  Her extensive language skills allow her to monitor developments and help clients tackle EU Data Privacy, Cybersecurity and Consumer Law issues in various EU and ROW jurisdictions.

On May 4, 2023, the Advocate General (“AG”) of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued its opinion in case C-683/21, which examines the GDPR concepts of “controller”, “joint controller”, and “processor”, as well as the GDPR’s liability system.

Continue Reading CJEU’s Advocate General Issues Opinion on Concept of Controller, Joint Controller, Processor, and Administrative Fines

In May 2023, the Spanish Supervisory Authority (“SA”) issued a detailed guidance paper on GDPR compliance in the context of data spaces.  The paper acknowledges EU and Member State level initiatives for the creation of data spaces (such as the Data Governance Act, the proposed Data Act, and the proposed European Health Data Space) and provides insight into how the SA expects companies to meet their GDPR obligations when participating in those data spaces.

Continue Reading Spanish Data Protection Authority Issues Guidance on Data Spaces

On April 27, 2023, the Advocate General (“AG”) of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued its opinion in the case C-807/21 on the conditions for imposing GDPR fines on legal persons (e.g., companies).  He opined that Member States’ law may not stipulate conditions going beyond those set out in the GDPR that make it more difficult to impute GDPR infringements to companies.  In addition, he is of the opinion that the GDPR penalties may only be imposed on intentional or negligent conducts, since the GDPR does not provide for a strict liability (no fault) system.

Continue Reading CJEU’s Advocate General Issues Opinion on GDPR Fines Against Companies

On April 18, 2023, the European Commission published its proposal for an EU Cyber Solidarity Act (“CSA”).  It aims to strengthen incident detection, situational awareness, and response capabilities, and to ensure that entities providing services critical for day-to-day life can access expert support to manage their cyber risk and respond to incidents.  Specifically, the CSA aims to promote information sharing about cyber incidents and vulnerabilities, to help improve the cyber resilience of critical entities, and to create an EU-wide resource for incident management.

The CSA adds another layer to the increasingly crowded landscape of EU cybersecurity laws.  The proposed law would interact with the revised Network and Information Security Directive (“NIS2”) and certifications issued under the Cybersecurity Act. Private companies in specific sectors will also have to consider potential overlap with the forthcoming Cyber Resilience Act and the financial services-focused Digital Operation Resilience Act.

Below, we set out three striking features of the CSA that are likely to be of particular relevance to private companies.

Continue Reading Three Interesting Features of the Proposed EU Cyber Solidarity Act

On March 22, 2023, the German Conference of Independent Supervisory Authorities (“SAs”) adopted an opinion on websites that offer users a choice between (i) a free version that tracks users’ behavior or (ii) a (usually paid) version that does not track users’ behavior.

Continue Reading German Supervisory Authorities Publish Opinion on (Paid) Subscription Websites

On March 24, 2023, the Austrian Supervisory Authority (“Austrian SA”) held that a credit referencing agency (“Agency”) breached the GDPR by unlawfully processing personal data obtained from a third party in order to process it to conduct credit assessments.  It decided that the Agency breached the GDPR’s principle of lawfulness because it did not have a valid legal basis to process the personal data.  This case will be relevant for organizations assessing their lawful basis for processing personal data.

Continue Reading Austrian Supervisory Authority Issues Decision on the Collection of Personal Data by Credit Referencing Agency

The EU’s AI Act Proposal is continuing to make its way through the ordinary legislative procedure.  In December 2022, the Council published its sixth and final compromise text (see our previous blog post), and over the last few months, the European Parliament has been negotiating its own amendments to the AI Act Proposal.  The European Parliament is expected to finalize its position in the upcoming weeks, before entering into trilogue negotiations with the Commission and the Council, which could begin as early as April 2023.  The AI Act is expected to be adopted before the end of 2023, during the Spanish presidency of the Council, and ahead of the European elections in 2024. 

During negotiations between the Council and the European Parliament, we can expect further changes to the Commission’s AI Act proposal, in an attempt to iron out any differences and agree on a final version of the Act.  Below, we outline the key amendments proposed by the European Parliament in the course of its negotiations with the Council.

Continue Reading A Preview into the European Parliament’s Position on the EU’s AI Act Proposal

The EU Representative Actions Directive (“RAD”) was meant to have been transposed by all EU member states by December 25, 2022. However, the EU Commission announced on January 27, 2023, that only three out of the 27 EU member states have properly transposed the RAD into their national legislation as required, and that it will now start issuing formal notices to the remaining countries to transpose the RAD as soon as possible.

As reported in our previous blog post, the RAD aims to harmonize member state frameworks on collective actions (i.e., whereby multiple claimants may lodge a claim or claims as a group) across the EU. It sets minimum requirements with respect to collective actions on a wide range of topics, including data protection matters (see also our blog post on the implications of RAD for data protection infringements and our separate blog post on the Court of Justice of the EU’s interpretation of Article 80(2) GDPR on data protection-related collective actions). This blogpost provides an overview of the RAD and its implementation status by EU member states.

Continue Reading National Transposition of the EU Representative Actions Directive: What is the Current Status?

On February 20, 2023, the European Commission launched an initiative to further specify procedural aspects relating to the enforcement of the GDPR (“ procedural initiative”). The aim of the procedural initiative is to clarify the administrative procedure that applies in cross-border investigations and enforcement under the GDPR. These rules are expected to clarify and complement the existing rules on cooperation and dispute resolution under GDPR Articles 60 and 65.

This procedural initiative was announced in the Commission’s work program for 2023, and the text of the proposal is not yet available. The European Commission is expecting to publish a draft regulation on procedural rules relating to the enforcement of the GDPR in Q2 2023.

Continue Reading European Commission Plans to Improve Cooperation Between Supervisory Authorities in Cross-Border GDPR Cases

On February 9, 2023, the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU”) released two separate rulings on the dismissal of data protection officers (“DPOs”) under the German Federal Data Protection Law (“German DPL”) (C-453/21 and C-560/21).  The main question in both cases was whether Section 6(4) of the German DPL which permits the dismissal of a DPO with “just cause” is compatible with the GDPR.  In short, the CJEU (i) found that the provision was compatible with the GDPR because EU member states can use “just cause” as a threshold for dismissal as long as this does not undermine the objectives set for DPOs under the GDPR, and (ii) clarified the criteria EU member states should take into account to determine whether there is a conflict of interest.

Continue Reading Court of Justice of the EU Clarifies Rules on Data Protection Officers’ Dismissal and Conflicts of Interest