Facebook takes moral motion against Irish privateness watchdog
Facebook’s moral motion against the Knowledge Protection Rate will strive to support the company’s skill to transfer European electorate’ recordsdata to the US no topic its decrease privateness protections
Sebastian Klovig Skelton ,
Printed: 11 Sep 2020 17: 15
Facebook is calling for a judicial review against the Irish Knowledge Protection Rate (DPC) after receiving a preliminary stammer from the privateness watchdog to suspend its recordsdata transfers to the US.
The social media wide lodged the papers ex parte within the Irish Excessive Court on 10 September, which will now be requested to test the validity and legality of the DPC’s preliminary ruling that Customary Contractual Clauses (SCCs) can’t be outmoded as the mechanism for transatlantic recordsdata transfers.
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) brought the legality of SCCs into quiz when it dominated to strike down the Privateness Shield agreement in July, on the foundation that it failed to be certain European electorate adequate correct of redress when recordsdata is peaceful by US intelligence services.
Even supposing the ECJ chanced on SCCs had been unexcited legally precise, it dominated that companies fill a accountability to be certain those they shared the guidelines with granted privateness protections equal to those contained in EU rules.
Austrian lawyer Max Schrems, who initiated the moral court cases that ended in the ECJ’s landmark decision (colloquially known as Schrems II), tweeted that Facebook’s decision to transfer looking a judicial review “shows (a) how they’ll announce each opportunity to dam a case, even before there’s a call, and (b) the draw in which it’s wholly illusionary to get this sort of case by in a couple of weeks or months within the Irish moral system”.
Every NOYB and Facebook had been approached for observation but failed to answer by the level of publication.
When approached about Facebook’s decision to transfer looking a judicial review, the DPC told Computer Weekly it are not commenting at the moment.
Extra moral motion against the DPC
In step with Schrems, his digital rights not-for-revenue NOYB used to be not urged of the DPC’s decision to grief the preliminary stammer, which has now effectively paused the draw of an ongoing grievance he talked about the regulator has already failed to behave on for seven years.
For this motive, NOYB has urged the DPC of its plans to file an interlocutory injunction for its “mismanagement” of the Facebook case.
“This limited case by the DPC is in particular attention-grabbing, as Facebook has indicated in a letter from 19 August 2020 that (after the quit of Stable Harbor, Privateness Shield and the SCCs) it’s now relying on a fourth moral foundation for recordsdata transfers: the alleged ‘necessity’ to outsource processing to the US beneath the contract with its customers,” it talked about.
“This signifies that any ‘preliminary stammer’ or ‘second investigation’ by the DPC on the SCCs by myself will, in actuality, not end Facebook from arguing that its EU-US recordsdata transfers continue to be moral. In observe Article 49 (1b), GDPR will seemingly be a suitable moral foundation for terribly limited recordsdata transfers (as an illustration, when an EU particular person is sending a message to a US particular person), but can’t be outmoded to outsource all recordsdata processing to the US,” talked about Schrems.
“We are succesful of due to the this fact protect the finest moral motion in Eire to be certain that the rights of customers are entirely upheld – no topic which moral foundation Facebook claims. After seven years, all cards must be save on the table.”
In step with an FAQ on the Schrems II judgment launched by the European Knowledge Protection Board (EDPB) on 23 July 2020, whether or not an organization can transfer consistent with SCCs will count upon the effects of their assessments, which must protect into consideration the conditions of the transfer and any supplementary measures that frigid be save in space.
“The supplementary measures along with SCCs, following a case-by-case diagnosis of the conditions surrounding the transfer, would must be certain that US rules doesn’t impinge on the adequate stage of protection they guarantee,” it talked about.
“Need to you come to the conclusion that, taking into fable the conditions of the transfer and which that you may perhaps also imagine supplementary measures, acceptable safeguards would not be ensured, it’s doubtless you’ll also very neatly be required to suspend or quit the transfer of deepest recordsdata. Nonetheless, while it’s doubtless you’ll also very neatly be intending to support transferring recordsdata no topic this conclusion, it’s doubtless you’ll also must stammer your competent supervisory authority.”
It added that, as regards to the necessity of transfers for the performance of a contract, companies can also unexcited endure in thoughts that deepest recordsdata can easiest be transferred when it’s done so ‘infrequently’.
It would must be established on a case-by-case foundation whether recordsdata transfers may perhaps perhaps perhaps be certain as “occasional” or “non-occasional”, it talked about.
“As a minimum, this derogation [of GDPR’s Article 49] can easiest be relied upon when the transfer is objectively famous for the performance of the contract.”
Snarl Continues Under
Learn extra on Social media technology
Irish privateness watchdog orders Facebook to end sending particular person recordsdata to the US
By: Sebastian Klovig Skelton
Why recordsdata exports from the EU will seemingly be spirited without Privateness Shield
By: Andrew Hartshorn
Schrems steps up rigidity on Irish recordsdata protection commissioner on Facebook’s recordsdata sharing with US
By: Invoice Goodwin
Privateness Shield: Companies face new hurdles to legally transfer recordsdata to the US
By: Invoice Goodwin