• Advertise
  • Membership
  • Sign inSUBSCRIBE
Legal Era
X
Sign in
  • Home
  • News
    +
    • From the Courts
    • Policy & Law
    • Supreme Court (India)
    • High Court (India)
    • TAX Updates
    • MARKET WATCH
    • Deal Street
    • Global Insights
    • IBC Cases
    • Hires & Moves
    • IP News
    • Competition Verdict
    • Global Articles
    • Global Deals
  • Articles
    +
    • ABOUT THE LAW
    • AWARDS & ACCOLADES
    • Aerospace
    • Agriculture
    • Alternate Dispute Resolution
    • Banking and Finance
    • Bankruptcy
    • Book Review
    • Bribery & Corruption
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Competition Law
    • Conference Reports
    • Consumer Products
    • Contract
    • Corporate Governance
    • Corporate Law
    • Covid-19
    • Cryptocurrency
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Protection
    • Defence
    • Digital Economy
    • E-commerce
    • Employment Law
    • Energy and Natural Resources
    • Entertainment and Sports Law
    • Environmental Law
    • FDI
    • Food and Beverage
    • Health Care
    • IBC Diaries
    • Insurance Law
    • Intellectual Property
    • International Law
    • Labour Laws
    • Litigation
    • Litigation Funding
    • Manufacturing
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • NFTs
    • Privacy
    • Private Equity
    • Project Finance
    • Real Estate
    • Risk and Compliance
    • Technology Media and Telecom
    • Tributes
    • Zoom In
    • Take On Board
    • In Focus
    • Law & Policy and Regulation
    • IP & Tech Era
    • Viewpoint
    • Arbitration & Mediation
    • Tax
    • Student Corner
    • ESG
    • Gaming
    • Inclusion & Diversity
  • Law Firms
    +
    • Global Law Firm
    • Asia Law Firm
    • India Law Firm
  • In-House
  • Rankings
  • E-Magazine
  • Legal Era TV
  • Events
  • News
    • From the Courts
    • Policy & Law
    • Supreme Court (India)
    • High Court (India)
    • TAX Updates
    • MARKET WATCH
    • Deal Street
    • Global Insights
    • IBC Cases
    • Hires & Moves
    • IP News
    • Competition Verdict
    • Global Articles
    • Global Deals
  • Articles
    • ABOUT THE LAW
    • AWARDS & ACCOLADES
    • Aerospace
    • Agriculture
    • Alternate Dispute Resolution
    • Banking and Finance
    • Bankruptcy
    • Book Review
    • Bribery & Corruption
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Competition Law
    • Conference Reports
    • Consumer Products
    • Contract
    • Corporate Governance
    • Corporate Law
    • Covid-19
    • Cryptocurrency
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Protection
    • Defence
    • Digital Economy
    • E-commerce
    • Employment Law
    • Energy and Natural Resources
    • Entertainment and Sports Law
    • Environmental Law
    • FDI
    • Food and Beverage
    • Health Care
    • IBC Diaries
    • Insurance Law
    • Intellectual Property
    • International Law
    • Labour Laws
    • Litigation
    • Litigation Funding
    • Manufacturing
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • NFTs
    • Privacy
    • Private Equity
    • Project Finance
    • Real Estate
    • Risk and Compliance
    • Technology Media and Telecom
    • Tributes
    • Zoom In
    • Take On Board
    • In Focus
    • Law & Policy and Regulation
    • IP & Tech Era
    • Viewpoint
    • Arbitration & Mediation
    • Tax
    • Student Corner
    • ESG
    • Gaming
    • Inclusion & Diversity
  • Law Firms
    • Global Law Firm
    • Asia Law Firm
    • India Law Firm
  • In-House
  • Rankings
  • E-Magazine
  • Legal Era TV
  • Events

Top Stories

  • Freshfields
    Finance partner Carol Van der Vorst
  • Time
    Time limit of 45 days under SARFAESI is
  • Justices-Uday-Umesh-Lalit-&-Aniruddha-Bose-&-Sudhanshu-Dhulia
    Supreme Court reserves judgement on
  • Justice-Yashwant-Varma
    Delhi High Court rules on not ousting
  • Deborah-Enix-Ross
    Deborah Enix-Ross sworn in as president
  • Dentons
    Dentons assists IMC Industrial Group in
  • Bombay-High-Court
    Bombay High Court rejects recovery
  • Pallavi-Bedi
    Erstwhile Partner at Luthra and Luthra -
  • WhatsApp
    NCLAT rules in favour of WhatsAPP, says
  • Jaewoo-Lee
    Jaewoo Lee appointed as the Managing
HomeNewsGlobal Insights
2 Jun 2022 5:30 AM GMT

Open letter by noyb on the EU-US data transfer deal

By: Nilima Pathak
Open letter by noyb on the EU-US data transfer deal

Open letter by noyb on the EU-US data transfer deal It warned the Commission against looking to buy 'another couple of years' by agreeing to an arrangement that undermined the judgments of CJEU The data privacy activist group, 'none of your business' (noyb) has recently published an open letter on the planned European Union-United States (EU-US) data transfer deal. The letter...

ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to Legal Era

Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion

Subscribe Now
AlreadyaSubscriber?SigninNow
View Plans


Open letter by noyb on the EU-US data transfer deal

It warned the Commission against looking to buy 'another couple of years' by agreeing to an arrangement that undermined the judgments of CJEU

The data privacy activist group, 'none of your business' (noyb) has recently published an open letter on the planned European Union-United States (EU-US) data transfer deal.

The letter was addressed to the EU Commissioner for Justice, the US Secretary of Commerce, the EDPB Chair, the Chairman of the European Parliament's Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, and the Justice Advisor at the Permanent Representation of France to the EU.

The letter followed the announcement of an agreement in principle for a new Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework (TADPF), which noyb claimed largely 'repeated' the previous EU-US Privacy Shield that was invalidated by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the landmark Schrems II decision.

The note made several observations, raising criticisms of the TADPF position expressed to date. However, it acknowledged that the text remained to be negotiated.

It said:

- The TADPF would rely on US executive orders, which would be 'structurally insufficient' to satisfy the CJEU's requirements and may not allow data subjects to enforce limitations in court.

- Replacing the current Presidential Policy Directive 28 on Signals Intelligence Activities with an executive order referencing the 'necessity and proportionality' of national security interests, was no substitute for amending the law and a substantive change in approach to the proportionality of US surveillance practices.

- The proposals for a new Data Protection Court constitute the creation of an executive 'body' (with limited independence) to deal with potential violations of the US laws and executive orders. Noyb did not consider that the approach satisfied the requirement for an effective and independent means of judicial redress for EU data subjects.

- The lack of updates to the previous Privacy Shield principles was problematic on the assertion that they referred to old laws, did not reflect current elements of the GDPR (eg: processing to be necessary and reliant on a legal basis, right of access), and more generally, were not 'essentially equivalent to the GDPR.'

- The negotiators should look to protect the rights to privacy and data protection, irrespective of geographical location and citizenship, in contrast to the approach currently taken by the likes of FISA 702 and US executive orders (which refer to the US/non-US persons).

In the letter, noyb stated that it was prepared to challenge any final adequacy decision that it considered failed to provide the required legal certainty.

Nilima Pathak

Nilima Pathak

TAGS:
  • none of your business 
  • noyb 
  • European Union 
  • United States 
  • Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework 
  • Court of Justice of the European Union 
Next Story
Similar Posts
See More
TAGS:
  • none of your business 
  • noyb 
  • European Union 
  • United States 
  • Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework 
  • Court of Justice of the European Union 
Trending Now
Can A Retailer Charge More Than MRP?

Can A Retailer Charge More Than MRP?

Freshfields

Finance partner Carol Van der Vorst joins Freshfields

The Hierarchy of Indian Courts

The Hierarchy of Indian Courts

Can an Arbitral Award Be Stayed Upon Surety and Personal Undertaking

Can an Arbitral Award Be Stayed Upon Surety and Personal

Recommended Articles
Can an Arbitral Award Be Stayed Upon Surety and Personal Undertaking

Can an Arbitral Award Be Stayed Upon Surety and Personal

Stamping Out Illegal Streaming Technology – Recent Amendments to The Copyright Act

Stamping Out Illegal Streaming Technology – Recent

The Quincecare Duty of Care Story Continues

The Quincecare Duty of Care Story Continues

Recent Developments and Trends in Diversity & Inclusion in Japan

Recent Developments and Trends in Diversity & Inclusion in

  • News
  • From the Courts
  • Supreme Court (India)
  • High Court (India)
  • Global Insights
  • Deal Street
  • Hires & Moves
  • Refund & Cancellation Policy
  • Articles
  • Zoom In
  • Take On Board
  • In Focus
  • Law & Policy
  • IP & Tech Era
  • Viewpoint
  • Arbitration & Mediation
  • Tax
  • Student Corner
  • Interviews
  • Law Firms
  • E-Magazine
  • Legal Era TV
  • Membership
  • Reader's Feedback
  • Cartoons
  • Subscribe
Follow Us
Subscribe Newsletter
  • 2022© All rights reserved Legal Era Media Group
  • Who We Are
  • Careers
  • Advertise with Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
Powered by  Hocalwire
X
X