Stewart Room on Twitter. Schrems: the law student who brought down a transatlantic data pact. By Reuters Published: 19:54 GMT, 6 October 2015 | Updated: 19:54 GMT, 6 October 2015 By Julia Fioretti and Georgina Prodhan BRUSSELS/FRANKFURT, Oct 6 (Reuters) - From Vienna cafes to the European Union's highest court, an Austrian law student's two-year battle against Facebook and mass U.S. surveillance culminated on Tuesday in a landmark ruling that has rippled across the business world.
Max Schrems, a 28-year-old Facebook user finishing his Ph.D in law at Vienna University, took an interest in the subject of privacy while studying for a semester abroad at Santa Clara University in California. The legal battle against mass U.S. surveillance that he subsequently pursued resulted in what lawyers called a "bombshell" ruling knocking down a data transfer framework between the European Union and the United States used by over 4,000 companies such as Google, Facebook and IBM . "Max Schrems and Edward Snowden. Facebook has repeatedly denied being a "back door" for U.S. spies. But Schrems appealed. Safe Harbour is dead - prepare for enhanced supervision - Data protection and privacy global insights.
By Stewart Room Today's landmark decision of the Court of Justice of the EU has delivered what was unthinkable only twelve months ago - the end of the Safe Harbour regime.
Mr Schrems, the litigant behind this case, has delivered a crashing blow on the data protection establishment here in the EU and in the United States. He has exposed what now seems to be fundamental vulnerability at the heart of the EU data protection regime, namely the matter of commercial and political compromise. The Safe Harbour Decision was adopted to maintain the free flows of personal data across the Atlantic, which are critical for economic and social prosperity. However, we now know that European law does not permit of these essential compromises. Rigidity means strictness. When the GDPR is adopted, it will empower the regulators with an unprecedented fining ability and the powers to intervene in business. The challenge to Safe Harbour - a totem for something much more fundamental - Data protection and privacy global insights. By Stewart Room Max Schrems and Edward Snowden.
What a combination. Two young men who have made indelible impacts on the world of data protection are the main protagonists in a landmark court case that has the potential to turn everything we know about data protection law on its head, while at the same time placing a great big question mark against the relevancy of the proposed EU General Data Protection Regulation before it is even adopted. Last week the Advocate General (A-G) of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) delivered his Opinion on the adequacy of the European Commission's Safe Harbour Decision. At the heart of this case is Mr Schrems' argument that Mr Snowden's disclosures about the NSA's mass surveillance programmes (inc. So how did the case get to the CJEU? The role of the A-G is to provide an Opinion for the CJEU on how the law operates. So, what are the impacts? I know this sounds odd, but in my view the Safe Harbour case isn't about Safe Harbour at all. 1. Data privacy opinion increases uncertainty for business - PwC comment - Press room.
Commenting on the opinion issued by the European Court of Justice on data-sharing between the European Union and United States, Stewart Room, PwC partner and head of PwC Legal's data privacy and protection practice, said: "The Advocate General's Opinion in Schrems v.
Data Protection Commissioner signifies a real game-changing view on the power of the European Commission to override the views of the data privacy regulators of the Member States. The Advocate General takes the view that the Commission cannot bind the national regulators. In other words, the views of the member states' regulators trump the central view of Brussels. "This presents a real threat to the Safe Harbour data transfer regime to the US.
PwC helps organisations and individuals create the value they’re looking for. PwC refers to the PwC network and/or one or more of its member firms, each of which is a separate legal entity.