The ECJ's videoconference system complies with data protection rules (EDPS)

With its Schrems II-judgment of 16 July 2020, the Court of Justice declared invalid the EU-US Privacy Shield, governing the transfer of personal data from the European Union to the United States. 

In the absence of this EU-US Privacy Shield, in February 2021 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), as an EU institution, referred its contract with its US-based videoconferencing operator to the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS). 

It asked the EDPS whether these rules complied with the EU’s data protection rules contained in the EU Data Protection Regulation. The EDPS issued two temporary authorisations, in 2021 and 2022, allowing the CJEU to use these contractual clauses. It adopted its final decision on 13 July 2023. 

The EDPS has decided that the CJEU’s videoconferencing services meet the data protection standards under EU Data Protection Regulation. The CJEU is the first EU institution to obtain such approval from the EDPS. The main characteristics of the videoconferencing services used by the CJEU are: 

  • no data is transmitted to the cloud for confidential meetings; 
  • very limited data transmitted to the cloud for other meetings with full and strong encryption (end-to-end encryption, one to many points) by default; 
  • combined with strong technical and organisational measures; and moreover 
  • the use of cloud servers located exclusively within the EU. 

The final decision of the EDPS adopted on 13 July 2023 may be consulted on the EDPS’ website. (source curia.europa.eu/photo freepik.com)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Greek Administrative Court rules state liable for Covid-19 vaccine side effects due to "excessive sacrifice"

Image
Greece: The Administrative Court of First Instance of Athens, in its decision no. 4202/2025, has ruled that the Greek State is liable for damages sustained by an individual due to side effects following a preventive "COVID-19" vaccination. This landmark decision was issued in a compensation lawsuit filed against the Hellenic Republic. The Case: Seeking Compensation for Vaccine-Related Harm The lawsuit was brought by a plaintiff seeking compensation for material damage and moral harm (non-pecuniary damage), alleging that they suffered severe side effects after their preventive COVID-19 vaccination with a specific vaccine. The initial claim was for €461,835.26, but this amount was subsequently restricted during the proceedings. The plaintiff based their claim on two legal grounds: Article 105 of the Introductory Law of the Civil Code (EισNAK): This article concerns the State's liability for compensation arising from illegal acts or omissions of its organs in the exe...
Read more

Ombudsman inquiry on Commission President’s text messages is a wake-up call for EU

Image
The European Ombudsman inquiry into the Commission’s handling of a request for text messages between its President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company is a wake-up call for all EU institutions about ensuring accountability in an era of instant messaging. One year after the initial request by a journalist, the Commission has still not clarified whether messages reported to concern major vaccine procurement deals exist and whether the public is entitled to see them. The Ombudsman had asked the Commission, in a finding of maladministration in January, to conduct a more thorough search for the text messages. The Commission’s recent response failed to say whether it had looked directly and correctly for the text messages and if not, why not. While the response recognised that work-related text messages can be EU documents, it reiterated that the Commission’s internal policy is, in effect, not to register text messages. The Ombudsman has closed  the inquiry  and upheld...
Read more

Child adoption without taking account of the mother’s wishes breached her human rights (ECtHR)

Image
In its Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Abdi Ibrahim v. Norway (application no. 15379/16) the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights.  The case concerned the decision by the Norwegian authorities to allow the adoption of a child by a foster family against his mother’s wishes. The mother, a Somali national who had moved to Norway, did not ask for her son’s return as he had spent a long time with his foster parents, but wished for him to maintain his cultural and religious roots.  The Court decided to examine the applicant’s wish to have her son brought up in line with her Muslim faith as an integral part of her complaint under Article 8, as interpreted and applied in the light of Article 9 (freedom of religion). It was not necessary to examine separately any alleged failures to comply with Article 9.  The Court pointed out t...
Read more

Fully-funded PhD position in AI, Law and Public Power

Image
Erasmus University Rotterdam School of Law, department Law & Markets, is looking for a fulltime PhD researcher in AI, Law and Public Power (4,5 years with 20% teaching tasks). PhD AI, Law and Public Power Are you curious about how artificial intelligence is changing state actor powers? Do you want to conduct critical and in-depth legal research at the intersection of technology, law and power? And would you like to combine that with academic teaching? Then this PhD position at Erasmus School of Law is for you. Within the Law & Markets team, you will spend 4.5 years researching the legal regulation of AI in the public sector. How do we protect fundamental rights when algorithms help decide on who receives public benefits, how to perform enforcement or how to enact environmental policy? What is the role of the state, and where is the limit of government power in a data-driven society? You will have plenty of space to choose your own research angle and work in a multidisci...
Read more

The length of court proceedings for 7 years and 8 months violated the right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time (ECtHR)

Image
In Chamber's judgment dated 5.9.2023 in the case of Van den Kerkhof v. Belgium (application no. 13630/19) the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) of the European Convention on Human Rights.  The case concerned the length of civil proceedings pending before a court of the Brussels judicial district. In the present case the proceedings were brought by the applicant against the vendors of a flat and the real estate agency that had served as an intermediary for the sale.  The Court held that the applicant’s case had not been heard within a reasonable time, noting that seven years and eight months had elapsed for two levels of jurisdiction and that the proceedings were still pending before the French-Language Brussels Court of First Instance.  It emphasised that the system for protecting the rights guaranteed by the Convention was based on the principle of subsidia...
Read more

Regulation (EU) 2023/2844 on the digitalisation of judicial cooperation and access to justice in cross-border civil, commercial and criminal matters, and amending certain acts in the field of judicial cooperation

Image
Regulation (EU) 2023/2844 establishes a uniform legal framework for the use of electronic communication between competent authorities in judicial cooperation procedures in civil, commercial and criminal matters and for the use of electronic communication between natural or legal persons and competent authorities in judicial procedures in civil and commercial matters. In addition, it lays down rules on: a) the use of videoconferencing or other distance communication technology for purposes other than the taking of evidence under Regulation (EU) 2020/1783; b) the application of electronic signatures and electronic seals; c) the legal effects of electronic documents; d) electronic payment of fees. Regulation applies to electronic communication in judicial cooperation procedures in civil, commercial and criminal matters, and hearings through videoconferencing or other means of distance communication technology in civil, commercial and criminal matters. This Regulation see...
Read more

Landmark Murder Conviction for Illegal Street Racing in Germany

Image
Following a fatal illegal street race in Ludwigsburg in March 2025, the Stuttgart District Court (LG Stuttgart) has issued a landmark ruling. The primary defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder, while his brother received 13 years for attempted murder. The race resulted in the deaths of two innocent young women when their vehicle was rammed at speeds exceeding 130 km/h in a 50 km/h zone. Intent vs. Negligence The core of the legal debate centered on the definition of intent. The defense argued for "negligent homicide," claiming the defendants never intended to kill anyone. The court applied the principle of eventual intent (dolus eventualis). It ruled that by racing at extreme speeds in a residential area, the defendants recognized the life-threatening danger and "accepted" the possibility of a fatal outcome in pursuit of the thrill of the race. The ruling utilizes Section 315d of the German Criminal Code (StGB), known as the "Raserparag...
Read more