background preloader

ECJ overturns data retention directive

Facebook Twitter

In this regard, Cecilia Malmström, Commissioner for Home Affairs said that “The judgment of the Court brings clarity and confirms the critical conclusions in terms of proportionality of the Commission’s evaluation report of 2011 on the implementation of the data retention directive.

The European Commission will now carefully asses the verdict and its impacts. The Commission will take its work forward in light of progress made in relation to the revision of the e-Privacy directive and taking into account the negotiations on the data protection framework” . EU executive plans no new data retention law. The Court of Justice of European Union declared invalid the Data Retention Directive no. 2006/24. On April 8, 2014, the Court of Justice of European Union declared invalid the Data Retention Directive no. 2006/24 (Judgment in Joined Cases C-293/12 and C-594/12, Digital Rights Ireland and Seitlinger and Others)

The Court of Justice of European Union declared invalid the Data Retention Directive no. 2006/24

The Court of Justice of European Union declared invalid the Data Retention Directive no. 2006/24. EU Member State Privacy Regulators Ponder Response to End of Data Retention Directive. By Jabeen Bhatti, Brett Allan King, Ali Qassim, Rick Mitchell, Bogdan Turek, Stephen Gardner, Eric Lyman, Christine Pirovolakis and Marcus Hoy April 22 — The recent invalidation of the European Union Data Protection Directive (2006/24/EC) was in large part welcomed by EU privacy officials, but what it means for specific data retention activities in the 28 member states in the bloc isn't clear, they told Bloomberg BNA.

EU Member State Privacy Regulators Ponder Response to End of Data Retention Directive

The directive was adopted in 2005 to require EU countries to adopt laws obliging telecommunications companies and Internet service providers to retain certain communications contact data for up to two years and to provide it to law enforcement authorities if requested.  La CJUE invalide la directive sur la conservation des données   EU tuomioistuin totesi tietojen säilyttämi... Tiedote 08.04.2014 16.414395688 Euroopan unionin tuomioistuin totesi 8. huhtikuuta 2014 antamassaan päätöksessä, että EU:n tietojen säilyttämistä koskeva direktiivi on pätemätön.

EU tuomioistuin totesi tietojen säilyttämi...

Tietojen säilyttämisestä annetussa direktiivissä eli niin sanotussa pakkotallennusdirektiivissä säädetään, että sähköisten viestintäpalvelujen tarjoajien on säilytettävä palvelujen käyttäjien liikenne- ja paikkatiedot sekä palvelun tilaajan tai käyttäjän tunnistamiseksi tarvittavat tarpeelliset tiedot. Direktiivi kuitenkin kieltää viestinnän sisällön ja haettujen tietojen säilyttämisen. Direktiivin tavoitteena oli yhdenmukaistaa jäsenvaltioiden tietojen säilyttämistä koskevia säännöksiä ja varmistaa näiden tietojen saatavuus vakavien rikosten torjuntaa, tutkintaa, selvittämistä ja syyteharkintaa varten. Unionin tuomioistuin totesi, että kyseisellä direktiivillä puututaan yksityiselämän suojaa ja henkilötietojen suojaa koskeviin perusoikeuksiin laajamittaisesti ja erityisen vakavasti. Lisätietoja.

EU tuomioistuin totesi tietojen säilyttämi... Proiectul de Lege pentru modificarea si completarea OUG nr. 111/2011 privind ... Félix Braz: "L’arrêt de la CJUE souligne clairement que tous les droits fonda... La Cour de Justice de l’Union européenne (CJUE) a déclaré invalide en date du 8 avril la directive 24/2006 sur la conservation des données sur base notamment des articles 7 et 8 de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne qui consacrent la protection de la vie privée et la protection des données à caractère personnel.

Félix Braz: "L’arrêt de la CJUE souligne clairement que tous les droits fonda...

Félix Braz: "L’arrêt de la CJUE souligne clairement que tous les droits fonda... PRESS RELEASES - Press release - Data retention directive: Commissioner Malms... European Commission Statement Brussels, 8 April 2014.

PRESS RELEASES - Press release - Data retention directive: Commissioner Malms...

European Court overturns EU mass surveillance law. By Kirsten Fiedler The European Court of Justice today ruled that the EU legislation on mass surveillance contravenes European law.

European Court overturns EU mass surveillance law

The case was brought before the Court by EDRi member Digital Rights Ireland, together with the Austrian Working Group on Data Retention. Data retention laws breach privacy rights, says legal advisor to the EU's highest court. Advocate General Pedro Cruz Villalón has recommended that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rule that the EU's Data Retention Directive be deemed to be "incompatible with the Charter of Fundamental Rights", according to a statement issued by the CJEU.

Data retention laws breach privacy rights, says legal advisor to the EU's highest court

The CJEU is not obliged to follow the opinion of Advocate Generals when issuing its judgment on cases, but it does so in the majority of cases. However, Cruz Villalón said that whilst the Directive should be scrapped he said the CJEU should suspend a ruling on the invalidity of the law to allow EU law makers to create a replacement law that delivers "the measures necessary to remedy the invalidity found to exist". The Data Retention Directive was established in 2006 to make it a requirement for telecoms and other electronic communications companies to retain personal data for a period determined by national governments of between six months and two years.

EU top court rules EU data retention law invalid. Cp140054en. [MàJ] La Cour de Justice invalide la directive sur la conservation des données. Mise à jour : La Cour de justice vient à l'instant de déclarer invalide la directive sur la conservation des données.

[MàJ] La Cour de Justice invalide la directive sur la conservation des données

Nous reviendrons dans quelques instants plus en détail sur les raisons qui ont guidé cette décision (l'arrêt au format PDF et notre analyse.) Deux affaires d’importance vont être rendues demain par la Cour de Justice de Luxembourg. EU Data Retention Directive Declared In Violation Of EU Law. IP-Watch Interns Summer 2013 IP-Watch interns Brittany Ngo (Yale Graduate School of Public Health) and Caitlin McGivern (University of Law, London) talk about their Geneva experience in summer 2013. 2:42.

EU Data Retention Directive Declared In Violation Of EU Law

Submit ideas to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch! We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Quantitative Analysis Of Contributions To NETMundial Meeting For IPW Subscribers A directory of IP delegates in Geneva. A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Monthly Reporter. EU Data Retention Directive Invalidated : : Privacy and Information Security Law Blog. Top EU court overturns data retention directive. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) on Tuesday overturned a controversial EU directive that allowed telephone and email providers to store private citizens' data en masse for scrutiny by investigators in later cases of serious crime.

Top EU court overturns data retention directive

The Luxembourg-based court ruled that the directive - passed by bloc's Council of Ministers in 2006, after terrorist attacks in London and Madrid - amounted to a grave intrusion into the private lives of citizens in the 28-nation bloc. "The directive interferes in a particularly serious manner with the fundamental rights to respect for private life and to the protection of personal data," the ECJ wrote, because it required providers to retain data and allowed national authorities to access it. Exact data on a person's location, travel movements and social contacts were recorded without the affected person ever being informed, the judges said.