Jay Modrall (BE)

Subscribe to all posts by Jay Modrall (BE)

The EU’s Data Act: Capstone of the EU Data Strategy

By Jay Modrall (BE) on March 16, 2022 Posted in General

On 23 February 2022 the EU Commission published its long-awaited Data Act, the last major building block of the Commission’s February 2020 Data Strategy. The Data Act: Is an ambitious piece of legislation with implications for consumers and businesses across the economy, not limited to the technology sector. Aims to facilitate access to data by … Continue reading

EU’s possible Data Act: What can we anticipate from the Inception Impact Assessment and the Consultation?

By Seiko Hidaka (UK) and Jay Modrall (BE) on July 5, 2021 Posted in Data Transfer, Enforcement, Regulatory response

The European Commission (EC) signalled plans for a new Data Act, to be published in late 2021, in its February 2020 Data Strategy Communication. The EC revealed more details in its 2021 Consultation and Inception Impact Assessment. The responses to the Consultation and Inception Impact Assessment are bound to shape the future of EU’s digital … Continue reading

EU data governance regulation – A wave of digital, regulatory and antitrust reform begins – Part Three

By Marcus Evans (UK), Jay Modrall (BE) and Michael Sinclair (UK) on December 17, 2020 Posted in Regulatory response

On 25 November 2020, the European Commission (EC) published its proposed Data Governance Regulation (the DGR), which will create a new legal framework to encourage the development of a European single market for data. This is part three of a series of three blog posts. In this blog post, we consider the DGR’s relationship to competition law rules. … Continue reading

EU data governance regulation – A wave of digital, regulatory and antitrust reform begins – Part Two

By Marcus Evans (UK), Jay Modrall (BE) and Michael Sinclair (UK) on December 17, 2020 Posted in Regulatory response

On 25 November 2020, the European Commission (EC) published its proposed Data Governance Regulation (the DGR), which will create a new legal framework to encourage the development of a European single market for data. This is part two of a series of three blog posts. In this blog post, we outline the new regimes for data sharing service … Continue reading

EU data governance regulation – a wave of digital, regulatory and antitrust reform begins – Part 1

By Marcus Evans (UK), Jay Modrall (BE) and Michael Sinclair (UK) on December 17, 2020 Posted in Regulatory response

On 25 November 2020, the European Commission (EC) published its proposed Data Governance Regulation (the DGR), which will create a new legal framework to encourage the development of a European single market for data. This is part one of a series of three blog posts. In this first blog post, we outline key aspects of the DGR, set … Continue reading

EU Data Package Highlights Connections between Data Protection and the Digital Single Market

By Jay Modrall (BE) on January 16, 2017 Posted in Data breach, General, Regulatory response

On January 10, 2017, the EU Commission published a package of documents on the EU’s data economy strategy, including e-privacy, data protection and the “European Data Economy.” The Commission documents, published in the context of the Commission’s digital single market (“DSM”) initiative announced in May 2015, illustrate again the strong links between the EU’s digital … Continue reading

Big data: French and German authorities explore antitrust issues

By Jay Modrall (BE) on May 12, 2016 Posted in Compliance and risk management, Data breach, General

On May 10, 2016, the French and German antitrust authorities published a joint study on competition law and the collection and use of data, particularly so-called big data (the Big Data Study). Data protection as such is outside the scope of EU competition laws, but antitrust authorities have considered the significance of data on a … Continue reading

Details of Privacy Shield published

By Marcus Evans (UK), Jay Modrall (BE), Christoph Ritzer (DE) and Sven Jacobs (DE) on March 1, 2016 Posted in Compliance and risk management, Regulatory response

On February 29, 2016, the European Commission published the documents comprising the new EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, the adoption of which we previously covered on our blog. In the Commission’s opinion, the new framework reflects the requirements set forth by the European Court of Justice in the Schrems ruling, which invalidated the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor framework. The … Continue reading

EU Article 29 Working Party prepares for General Data Protection Regulation and responsibilities as European Data Protection Board

By Marcus Evans (UK) and Jay Modrall (BE) on February 15, 2016 Posted in Compliance and risk management, Data breach, General, Regulatory response

On February 11, 2016, the Article 29 Working Party (WP29) issued a statement setting out its 2016 action plan for implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and its work programme for 2016-2018. WP29 will have 8 working groups leading the implementation of the 2016-2018 work programme. The statement highlights the following points: WP29 … Continue reading

EU-US Privacy Shield scrutinized in Article 29 Working Party initial response

By Marcus Evans (UK) and Jay Modrall (BE) on February 3, 2016 Posted in Regulatory response

On February 3, 2016, the Article 29 Working Party (WP29) released a statement on the consequences of the Schrems judgment, following an assessment of the legal framework and the practices of US intelligence services. The WP29 expressed continuing concerns about the US framework for processing personal data for intelligence purposes, in spite of recent reforms.… Continue reading

Political agreement on EU Data protection reforms: the real count-down to compliance has started

By Marcus Evans (UK) and Jay Modrall (BE) on December 17, 2015 Posted in Data breach, Regulatory response

On December 15, the Civil Liberties Committee (LIBE) of the European Parliament issued a press release announcing a provisional political agreement between the European Parliament and Council negotiators on the texts of both the General Data Protection Regulation and the Police & Judicial Cooperation Data Protection Directive. Formal approval by the Council is expected shortly and … Continue reading

Council and European Parliament reach agreement on NIS Directive

By Jay Modrall (BE) and Marcus Evans (UK) on December 10, 2015 Posted in Cybercrime, Regulatory response

On December 7, 2015, the Council of the European Union (the Council) reached an informal agreement with the European Parliament on a new EU directive on network and information security (NISD). The agreement marks the conclusion of two years of work, since the European Commission (the Commission) and the High Representative of the European Union … Continue reading

Belgian court orders Facebook to stop tracking non-members, rejects FB’s assertion of lack of jurisdiction

By Marcus Evans (UK) and Jay Modrall (BE) on November 23, 2015 Posted in Compliance and risk management, Dispute resolution and litigation

On November 9, 2015, the President of the Brussels Court of First Instance ordered Facebook to stop tracking non-members in Belgium without their consent. The court imposed a penalty of EUR 250,000 per day for non-compliance. The proceeding is the result of a formal recommendation that the Belgian Privacy Commission (BPC) issued in May 2015 … Continue reading

WP29 Issues Post-Safe Harbor Guidance

By Marcus Evans (UK), Jamie Nowak (DE) and Jay Modrall (BE) on October 16, 2015 Posted in General

The following is the statement of WP29 on the Schrems decision. It is a short opinion that we replicated here in full. We note that WP29 appears to suggest that model clauses and BCRs remain viable through at least January 2016, which is when WP29 would like to see the US and EU agree to a … Continue reading

CJEU decision in Schrems: what businesses should do next

By Marcus Evans (UK) and Jay Modrall (BE) on October 8, 2015 Posted in Regulatory response

This week, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) ruled that the EU-US Safe Harbor Decision is invalid in Case C-362/14 (the “Schrems” case). This followed a similar opinion from its Advocate General, which also sets out the facts of the case. The decision will impact businesses that rely on the EU-US Safe Harbor … Continue reading

Schrems: Commission holds press conference on ECJ ruling invalidating the Commission’s Safe Harbor Decision

By Marcus Evans (UK) and Jay Modrall (BE) on October 6, 2015 Posted in Regulatory response

As discussed in our post earlier, in today’s ruling on Case C-362/14 (the so-called “Schrems” case), the European Court of Justice (ECJ) invalidated the EU Commission’s “US Safe Harbor” decision with immediate effect. In the meantime, the EU Commission held a press conference discussing the impact of the judgement.… Continue reading

Schrems: ECJ invalidates the Commission’s Safe Harbor Decision

By Marcus Evans (UK), Jay Modrall (BE) and Jamie Nowak (DE) on October 6, 2015 Posted in Compliance and risk management

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled on Case C-362/14 (the Schrems case) earlier today, 6 October 2015. In its ruling, the ECJ – among other things – held that the EU Commission’s “US Safe Harbor” decision is invalid.… Continue reading

Day-after-Safe Harbor action plan: anticipating ECJ Schrems decision

By Marcus Evans (UK) and Jay Modrall (BE) on October 5, 2015 Posted in Regulatory response

As we have written extensively, the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ’s) ruling in the Schrems case on October 6, 2015 may effectively invalidate the US-EU Safe Harbor framework. While we believe that the Advocate General’s rationale for the proposal is weak, organizations that rely on the Safe Harbor are anxious about the consequences such a … Continue reading

Schrems Counterpoint: ECJ has good reasons to reject Safe Harbor invalidation

By Jay Modrall (BE) and Marcus Evans (UK) on October 1, 2015 Posted in Regulatory response

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) is expected to rule on Case C-362/14 (the “Schrems” case) on October 6, 2015. In deciding whether to reject or adopt its Advocate General’s recommendation to invalidate the US-EU Safe Harbor, the ECJ finds itself between the proverbial rock and a hard place. Rejecting the Safe Harbor would lead to uncertainty in the ongoing … Continue reading