The discussion paper on the proposed changes to Hong Kong’s Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance (Cap.486) (the PDPO) was debated by the Legislative Council’s Panel on Constitutional Affairs’ (the Panel) on 20 January. The proposals set out in LC Paper. No. CB(2) 512/19-20(03) (the Paper) are summarised in our earlier post.
Regulatory response
Discussion paper published on Hong Kong’s data protection law
Written by Partner Anna Gamvros and Associate Libby Ryan, both based in the Hong Kong office.
Earlier this week, the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau (the CMAB) released its discussion paper (LC Paper. No. CB(2) 512/19-20(03) (the Paper)…
Turkish Data Protection Board announces extension of VERBİS registration deadline – once again
The Turkish Data Protection Board announced the extension of VERBİS registration deadline until June 30, 2020.…
Turkey’s data protection legislation on data controller registry to impact data controllers outside of Turkey
Obligations
Turkey’s data protection legislation (TDPL) requires data controllers to notify the Turkish DPA of their processing activities. Unless exempt from the requirement, all data controllers (individuals and legal entities) who process personal data in Turkey must be registered with…
FTC to levy unprecedented $US5bn fine against Facebook
The Wall Street Journal reported that Federal Trade Commission and Facebook reached a settlement to resolve Facebook’s privacy issues.…
ICO’s draft Age Appropriate Design Code could seriously impact processing of under 18’s personal data
On 15 April 2019, the ICO opened a public consultation on a draft code of practice titled Age Appropriate Design (the “Code”). The Code will remain open for public consultation until 31 May 2019.
The consultation document is described as a “code of practice for online services likely to be accessed by children.” However, its potential impact is in fact wider, and is perhaps better described as applying to all online services that are not demonstrably unlikely to be accessed by children, which it controversially defines as individuals under 18. For this reason, the Code in its current form will have implications for almost all providers and users of online services.
EDPB issues new opinion on interplay between Clinical Trials Regulation and the GDPR
On January 23, 2019, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) issued an opinion on the interplay between the Clinical Trials Regulation (“CTR”) and the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”).…
First multi-million Euro GDPR fine: Google LLC fined €50 million under GDPR for transparency and consent infringements in relation to use of personal data for personalized ads
On January 21,2019 the French data protection authority (the CNIL) imposed a major fine on the U.S. Google entity, Google LLC. It follows two complaints filed as soon as the GDPR came into force by two consumer rights associations, None of Your Business and La Quadrature du Net.
We focus here on four key aspects of the decision: (a) why the Irish Data Protection Commission (Irish DPC) did not take the case; (b) the consent mechanism failings; (c) the privacy policy failings; and (d) the amount of the fine.
European Commission adopts adequacy decision on Japan
On January 23rd 2019, the European Commission adopted its adequacy decision in relation to the export of personal data from the European Union (EU) to Japan. Concurrently, Japan has adopted an equivalent decision in relation to the…
Pennsylvania Supreme Court holds common law duty for employers extends to protecting sensitive employee information
On November 21, 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court broke new ground by holding that employers have a legal duty to take reasonable care to safeguard its employees’ sensitive personal information from cyberattacks.