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

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Featured Stings

The 28 EU leaders care more about fiscal orthodoxy than effectively fighting youth unemployment

Greece @ MWC14: Greek-born mobile champions at MWC 2014

Scotland in United Kingdom: It’s either the end or the beginning of the end

G20 LIVE: G20 Statement on the fight against terrorism

Joris in Indonesia

Google strongly rejects EU antitrust charges and now gets ready for the worst to come

The US repelled EU proposals on common rules for banks

Eurozone 2013: Where to?

How much more social deterioration can the EU people endure?

Intel, Almunia and 1 billion euros for unfair potatoes

The succesful cooperation

Italy’s rescue operation Mare Nostrum shuts down with no real replacement. EU’s Triton instead might put lives at risk

Unanswered questions for Europe’s youth in President Juncker’s State of Union

It ain’t over until Google says it’s over

Migration crisis: how big a security threat it is?

Greece returns to markets at a high cost to taxpayers, after four years out in the cold

Why Commissioner Rehn wants us all to work more for less

TTIP: why it is worth not to pull the covers over your head?

EU Commission: a rise in wages and salaries may help create more jobs

Tax evasion and fraud threaten the European project

Fostering global citizenship in medicine

No way out for Eurozone’s stagnating economy

Britain heading to national schism on exit from EU

Cross-roads

The IMF sees Brexit’s ‘substantial impact’ while the world’s economy holds its breath

Is the EU competent enough to fight human smuggling in 2015?

OECD tells Eurozone to prepare its banks for a tsunami coming from developing countries

How Germany strives to mold ECB’s monetary policy to her interests

Banks suffocate the real economy by denying loans

Will Brexit shatter the EU or is it still too early to predict?

Assembly of European Regions @ European Business Summit 2014: The European regions on the path to recovery

Breaking barriers between youth in the new tech era: is there an easy way through?

IMF’s Lagarde indirectly cautioned Eurozone on deflation

Population in crisis hit EU countries will suffer for decades

Any doubt?

EU threatens Japan to suspend FTA negotiations if…

Migration crisis, a human crisis after all

The Banking Union divides deeply the European Union

A new crop of EU ‘Boards’ override the democratic accountability and undermine the EU project

Germany tries to save Europe from war between Ukraine and Russia

EU to gain the most from the agreement with Iran

EU countries invested €5 trillion abroad

What we need for a better European Solidarity Corps

Azerbaijan chooses Greek corridor for its natural gas flow to EU

ECOFIN: Protecting bankers and tax-evaders

French Prime Minister passes Stability Program and takes his ‘café’ in Brussels this June

Migration Crisis: how to open the borders and make way for the uprooted

EU Parliament raises burning issues over the FTA with the US

Why growth is now a one way road for Eurozone

The impossible end of the war in Syria

Access to healthcare: what do we lack?

Does EURES really exist?

Brussels wins game and match in Ukraine no matter the electoral results

New VAT rules in the EU: how a digital sea could have become an ocean

Yes, together we can make a change! YO!Fest and EYE 2016

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

Commission goes less than mid-way on expensive euro

Except Poland, can climate change also wait until 2021 for the EU Market Stability Reserve to be launched?

Why banks escape from competition rules but not pharmaceutical firms

What the US and the world can expect from the 8 November election?

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s