On October 7, 2022, President Biden signed an Executive Order directing the steps that the United States will take to implement its commitments under the new EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework. The framework was announced by the U.S. and the EU Commission in March 2022, after reaching a political agreement in principle (see our blog post
On August 11, 2021, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) opened a public consultation to solicit stakeholder input regarding the UK’s approach to regulating international transfers of personal data under the UK General Data Protection Regulation (“UK GDPR”) (see here). To kick off this initiative, the ICO published a consultation paper setting out various policy options that the UK is considering, as well as:
- a draft set of contractual templates to facilitate transfers of personal data outside the UK, including: (1) a draft international data transfer agreement (“IDTA”); and (2) a draft international transfer addendum to be appended to the recently approved EU standard contractual clauses (“EU Addendum”); and
- a draft transfer impact assessment tool designed to help controllers and processors transferring personal data under the UK GDPR satisfy the requirements articulated by the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) in the Schrems II decision (see here).
The ICO has requested that interested stakeholders submit their feedback by no later than October 7, 2021. In this blog post, we summarize these documents and tools, and identify topics that interested stakeholders may want to address when preparing their submission to the public consultation.…
On June 21, 2021, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) published its finalized recommendations on measures that supplement transfer tools to ensure compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), where organizations transfer personal data from the European Economic Area (“EEA“) to a country outside the EEA (“third country”) (see here). While the final version retains much of the language of the draft version released in November 2020 (see here), it includes several notable updates.
Continue Reading EDPB Adopts Finalized Recommendations on Supplemental Transfer Tools to Ensure GDPR-Compliant Data Transfers
On June 1, 2021, several German supervisory authorities (“SAs”) announced the launch of a “nationwide investigation” into German companies transferring personal data outside of the European Economic Area. Currently, there is no official list of all the SAs participating in the investigation, but at least 8 of Germany’s 16 regional SAs have announced their intention to take part in it, including: Baden Wuerttemberg, Bavaria, Berlin, Brandenburg, Hamburg, Lower Saxony, Rhineland-Palatinate, and Saarland.
Continue Reading German Supervisory Authorities Probe Data Transfers
Today, June 4th, 2021, the European Commission (“Commission”) published the final version of its new standard contractual clauses for the international transfer of personal data (“SCCs”) (see here). While the final version retains much of the language of the draft version released in November 2020 (see here), it includes several notable updates. When finalizing the SCCs, the Commission took into account the joint opinion of the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) and the European Data Protection Supervisor, feedback submitted by stakeholders during the public consultation period, and the opinions of EU Member States’ representatives.
In this blog post, we identify several key features of the new SCCs that organizations should keep in mind when preparing to implement them in contractual agreements going forward.…
On February 3, 2021, the Conference of the Supervisory Authorities (“SAs”) of Germany (known as the Datenschutzkonferenz or “DSK”) published minutes from its meetings held in November 2020 (available here, in German). The minutes include discussions about how the German SAs plan to enforce the recent Schrems II ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”). Notably, the Berlin SA (coordinator of the DSK’s Schrems II task force) sought consensus to ensure a joint enforcement approach.
Continue Reading German Supervisory Authorities Plan to Circulate Questionnaires on Personal Data Transfers in Wake of Schrems II Decision
On 11 November 2020, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) issued two draft recommendations relating to the rules on how organizations may lawfully transfer personal data from the EU to countries outside the EU (“third countries”). These draft recommendations, which are non-final and open for public consultation until 30 November 2020, follow the EU Court of Justice (“CJEU”) decision in Case C-311/18 (“Schrems II”). (For a more in-depth summary of the CJEU decision, please see our blog post here and our audiocast here. The EDPB also published on 24 July 2020 FAQs on the Schrems II decision here).
The two recommendations adopted by the EDPB are:
- Recommendations 01/2020 on measures that supplement transfer tools to ensure compliance with the EU level of protection of personal data (“Draft Recommendations on Supplementary Measures”); and
- Recommendations 02/2020 on the European Essential Guarantees for surveillance measures (“Recommendations on EEG”).
On September 7, 2020, the German data protection supervisory authority for Baden-Wuerttemberg (“DPA-BW”) released new guidelines following the Schrems II judgment on how companies should transfer data to third countries. For a more in-depth summary of the CJEU’s Schrems II decision, please see our previous blog post here and our audiocast episode here.
Continue Reading New Guidelines for Companies from German Supervisory Authority (DPA-BW) following Schrems II
In the wake of the Court of Justice of the European Union’s (“ECJ”) Schrems II decision invalidating the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield (“Privacy Shield”) but upholding the validity of standard contractual clauses (“SCCs”), the U.S. government has released a White Paper entitled “Information on U.S. Privacy Safeguards Relevant to SCCs and Other EU Legal Bases for EU-U.S. Data Transfers after Schrems II.” The Schrems II ruling requires companies relying on SCCs “to verify, on a case-by-case basis,” whether the level of protections afforded by the SCCs are respected and observed in the recipient country. According to the cover letter accompanying the White Paper, it “outlines the robust limits and safeguards in the United States pertaining to government access to data” as part of “an effort to assist organizations in assessing whether their transfers offer appropriate data protection in accordance with the ECJ’s ruling.”
The cover letter emphasizes that while the White Paper is intended to help companies make the case that they can transfer personal data from the EU to the United States in compliance with EU law, it does not “eliminate the urgent need for clarity from European authorities or the onerous compliance burdens generated by the Schrems II decision.” It concludes by citing the importance of the “$7.1 trillion transatlantic economic relationship” and stating that “the Trump Administration is exploring all options at its disposal and remains committed to working with the European Commission to negotiate a solution that satisfies the ECJ’s requirements while protecting the interests of the United States.” …
Continue Reading U.S. Government Issues White Paper on Privacy Safeguards Following Schrems II
On 16 July, 2020, the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU”), issued its decision in the Schrems II case. In short, the CJEU invalidated the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield and clarified that the use of standard contractual clauses (“SCCs”) requires data controllers to conduct a case-by-case assessment of the level of data protection that SCCs can provide, taking into account the nature of the personal data transfer(s) and the country of destination. For a more in-depth summary of the CJEU’s decision, please see our blog post here and our audiocast here.
Now, almost two months after the decision, it is an opportune time for businesses to take stock of what exactly happened and assess the practical implications of the judgement. The result of this impact analysis may be underwhelming for some. So far, European regulators have been mostly silent (save a few exceptions) and have not issued any actionable guidance to speak of. In all fairness, the obligations imposed by the CJEU’s judgement may be just as daunting for regulators to apply in practice as for businesses. As a result, companies and practitioners are left grappling with what exactly they should do in the aftermath of this decision.
In this blog post, we set out some recommendations for immediate and long-term actions that businesses may want to consider implementing. Note, however, that much depends on the nature of the personal data transfers concerned. As can be gleaned from the CJEU’s judgement, some transfers are more sensitive than others, and some sectors are more sensitive than others (in particular, the electronic communications sector). These risk-based considerations should inform how businesses prioritize remedial actions going forward.…