EU Court of Justice invalidates Safe Harbour and the game for thousands US businesses suddenly changes

A hearing at the European Court of Justice (European Court of Justice, 2010)

A hearing at the European Court of Justice (European Court of Justice, 2010)

In what some American media already call a “dramatic judgement”, the European Court of Justice last week changed the course of history for data protection and handling between the EU and the United States. After having declared the “Safe Harbour” data transfer agreement invalid earlier last week, on October 06, the EU’s highest court last Friday urged the EU and the United to shape a new trans-Atlantic data-transfer deal.

A paper monster

The ruling took immediate effect, and surely opened a big hole in the EU-US business legislation and data protection environments. The decision by the European Court of Justice junked a 15-years-old regulation and indeed left some 4,500 US companies, which have previously relied on Safe Harbour, linger in a potential bureaucratic nightmare. To understand why, it is necessary to take a step back and review some data privacy history.

Background

Since 2000, thousands of US companies have relied on Safe Harbour to comply with the “EU Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC” (the “Directive”) on the protection of personal data, and – more practically – to transfer personal data from the EU to the US. Indeed the Safe Harbour has been for fifteen years the “bridge” for thousands of businesses to cope with the many differences between the American and the European regulations. While the United States has a patchwork of various state laws on the privacy topic, the EU has a broad overarching law covering all industry sectors , the “Directive”, which prohibits the transfer of personal data outside of the EU unless there is an “adequate level of protection of the data.”

In order to facilitate business, the two superpowers negotiated a “Safe Harbour” agreement that allowed US companies to process and transfer EU citizens’ personal data only after qualifying for certain rules and principles. The Safe Harbour Framework indeed required adherence to guidance materials and seven basic principles: notice, choice, onward transfer, security, data integrity, access and enforcement. Under Safe Harbor, companies were basically free to transfer personal data from the EU to U.S in compliance with the EU Data Protection Directive and European privacy laws.

The NSA Leaks and the Schrems case

Post the Snowden scandal, more than 2 years ago, things have changed though. Edward Snowden’s National Security Agency leaks indeed showed that European data stored by US companies was not safe from surveillance that would be illegal in Europe, and many regulators, organisations and people started to become dig the matter further.

Maximillian Schrems, an Austrian law student and Facebook user, then argued that the Irish Data Protection Commissioner failed to protect him from mass surveillance by the US NSA. Schrems argued that the actions of many large US firms like Facebook, that basically store all – or at least a vast majority of – their customers data in the USA and then transfer personal data to the NSA as part of the infamous PRISM program, did not provide adequate protection of EU citizens’ data being transferred to third countries.

So the European Court of Justice was asked to investigate and to eventually rule on whether the Safe Harbour Framework was able to sufficiently protect the EU citizen under the EU Data Protection Directive. The court found that the Safe Harbour was “inadequate” to serve its original purpose, and that it did not “satisfy the requirements of the directive”.

The Court’s ruling

“The Court declares the Safe Harbour Decision invalid”, the official document by the Curia stated. “This judgment has the consequence that the Irish supervisory authority is required to examine Mr Schrems’ complaint with all due diligence”, it also declared. The document also cited that “even if the Commission has adopted a decision”, the national supervisory authorities, when dealing with a claim, “must be able to examine, with complete independence, whether the transfer of a person’s data to a third country complies with the requirements laid down by the directive”. Those are heavy words which are destined to change the entire game.

What happens now?

The full impact of this decision is currently hard to see, but for sure the future of cross border data transfers between the EU and US becomes now a big question-mark. By scrapping the Safe Harbour, the European Court of Justice has practically and immediately returned the issue to the hands of regulators in each country: from this moment onwards each EU member nation will decide its own way when it comes to interact with the US on data privacy and handling.

The impact on business

From a business point of view, this could turn into a real nightmare for American firms, as we said. US companies (potentially not only tech firms) that do business in Europe could be requested to keep data locally in each country that they operate in. Moreover, the decision creates new legal risks for companies and surely puts at risk all the bloc’s plans to create a single digital market, because it will jeopardize the region and the possibilities of doing business here by non-EU companies. Indeed now it might happen that one country might block a company’s transfer to the US while the regulator in another gives the green light. Indeed pretty fare from the “unity” dream Commissioners are foreseeing.

“What we need now is to work closely with the Americans to find a solution to get a safe ‘Safe Harbour’, which is in the interest of both Europeans and Americans”, briefly stressed Andrus Ansip, European Commission Vice-President in charge of digital single market. Mr. Ansip also said he would be meeting with businesses next week to discuss practical concerns but urged the EU and the U.S. to continue work towards creating a new Safe Harbour agreement.

A Trans-Atlantic case

Last weeks’ decision once again unveils the many differences between two of the worlds’ pioneers in privacy and data protection laws, which as one can imagine we’ll have huge impacts in the negotiations of trans-Atlantic deals such as TTIP.

It is impossible to determine in detail now the scale of the shock the ruling by the ECJ will have on real economy, but it will for sure add pressure on the ongoing negotiations between the two blocks around data protection, and possibly on all the other matters which are found on the Transatlantic table of negotiations.

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Featured Stings

Stopping antimicrobial resistance would cost just USD 2 per person a year

Our present and future tax payments usurped by banks

Why Italy will not follow the Greek road; Eurozone to change or unravel

Worldwide UN family celebrates enduring universal values of human rights

We are close yet so far…

China hopes EU Commissioner De Gucht drops super anti-dumping tariff on solar panels

Can the EU last long if it cuts Cyprus out?

Could Rwanda become Africa’s healthcare leader?

Do the EU policies on agro-food smell?

EU-UK: A deal synonymous to ‘remain’, England pays the Irish price

Court of Auditors: EU budget money is there to be spent not to create value

“BEUC cautions against TTIP that would seek to align EU and US chemicals management frameworks”

EU Top Jobs summit ended with no agreement: welcome to Europe’s quicksand!

A new bioeconomy strategy for a sustainable Europe

Window for a Brexit deal: Brussels to think again May’s proposal

MEPs react to breaches of human rights in Moldova, Burundi and Somalia

MWC 2016 LIVE: Telenor CEO calls on operators to embrace Mobile Connect initiative

European Commission recommends to the European Council (Article 50) to find that decisive progress has been made in Brexit negotiations

European Youth Capital 2019 announced: Novi Sad, Serbia

EU unveils plan to accelerate Capital Markets Union ahead of London’s departure from the bloc

7 key challenges for the future of ASEAN – and how to solve them

COP21 Breaking News_04 December: Launch of CREWS, climate risk & early warning systems

‘Dire consequences’ for a million children in the Middle East, North Africa, as funding dwindles

Dear China

Respect people’s peaceful assembly and fair trail rights, UN human rights wing urges Nicaragua

Despite funding crisis, Palestine refugee classrooms set to stay open, says UNRWA

How wealthy people transmit this advantage to their children and grand children

ECB should offer more and cheaper liquidity if Eurozone is to avoid recession

Aid teams respond to escalating southwest Syria conflict: 750,000 civilians are at risk

Social inclusion: how much should young people hope from the EU? 

Parliament adopts its position on digital copyright rules

To win combat against HIV worldwide, ‘knowledge is power’, says UNAIDS report

Africa’s inspiring innovators show what the future could hold

IMF: All you want to know about Argentina

EU’s Bank signs € 150 million loan to India as part of record investment in clean energy

Why Eurozone’s problems may end in a few months

Have central banks missed the exit train?

For how long will terror and economic stagnation be clouding the European skies?

Charlie’s tragedy energized deeper feelings amongst Europeans; back to basics?

Trump asked Merkel to pay NATO arrears and cut down exports ignoring the EU

We can’t tell if we’re closing the digital divide without more data

Erasmus+: an expected budget of €3 billion to be invested in young Europeans and to help create European Universities in 2019

UNICEF appeals for end to ‘war on children’ in Syria and Yemen

Economic sentiment and business climate stagnate in miserable euro area

UN chief condemns attack targeting international forces in northern Mali

Rule of law in Hungary: Parliament should ask Council to act, say committee MEPs

Budget MEPs approve €104.2 m in EU aid to Greece, Spain, France and Portugal

Lithuania vs Parliament over 2014 EU budget

Further reforms can foster more inclusive labour markets in The Netherlands

Banks suffocate the real economy by denying loans

EU’s new environmental policy on biofuels impacts both the environment and the European citizen

Northern Ireland: Parliament wants to secure post-Brexit regional funding

A Sting Exclusive: “Europe must be more ambitious in COP21 and lead on climate finance and sustainable development”, Green UK MEP Jean Lambert points out from Brussels

Russia and the West use the same tactics to dismember Ukraine

Campaign kicks off with High-level Event on #FairInternships

How dearly will Germany pay for the Volkswagen emissions rigging scandal

11 lessons the history of business can teach us about its future

IMF: How To Deal With Failed Banks

A Sting Exclusive: “Junior Enterprises themselves carry out projects focusing on the environment”, JADE President Daniela Runchi highlights from Brussels

Is Data Privacy really safe seen through Commissioner’s PRISM?

‘Passport to dignity’ that schools represent may expire fast, without emergency funding warns UN Palestine refugee agency

More Stings?

Speak your Mind Here

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s