Examples of Schrems II Judgment in a sentence
The CJEU expressed concern in the Schrems II Judgment that EO 12333 could result in the “bulk collection” of PERSONAL INFORMATION, but companies cannot be compelled to participate in such bulk collection: EO 12333 does not oblige them to, and warrantless demands under FISA 702 programs require targeted and minimized data collection.
The CJEU Schrems II Judgment did not express concern that such procedures are outside the norms in democratic societies or result in an inability to comply with a commitment to safeguard the privacy of personal information.
The relevant Central Intelligence Agency Guidelines were issued in 2017 and are publicly available (but they were not available at the time of the 2016 EU Privacy Shield decision and are not addressed in the Schrems II Judgment).
Indiegogo Terms of Use and TIA in view of EDPB RECOMMENDATIONS In the Schrems II Judgment, the CJEU did not make any clear definition of the factors that may be included as part of the data controller's TIA.
The Schrems II Judgment of the European Court of Ju- stice (ECJ) has caused quite a stir: from the declaration of invalidity of the Privacy Shield, to standard contractualclauses that will generally no longer be readily applicable, to the ‘additional measures’.
The Schrems II Judgment The New SCCs were formulated to replace the Old SCCs, taking into account the adoption of the GDPR and the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) in Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland Limited and Maximillian Schrems, Case C-311/18 (commonly known as the “Schrems II Judgment”).
In the wake of the Schrems II Judgment, EDPB issued Recommendations 01/2020 (Recommendations 01/2020 on measures that supplement transfer tools to ensure compliance with the EU level of protection of personal data)44, that among other things aims to help data exporters (entities transferring data to third countries) with the conduct of the TIA.
The participation in the coordinated action was based on ongoing supervision and enforcement activities of the EDPS, in particular the two ongoing investigations opened following the Schrems II Judgment.
Introduction The legal situation brought about by the judgment of the European Court of Justice (“CJEU") of July 16, 2020, Case No. C-311/18 ("Schrems II Judgment") has caused perplexity and uncertainty within the industry on how to deal with international data transfers.
It also dealt with current data protection policy issues at international and EU level, including data pro- cessing in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.In terms of content, the EDPB’s work in the second half of the year was significantly influenced by the outcome of the Schrems II Judgment (ECJ, Judgment of 16 July 2020, Case C-311/18).