No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Digital Rights Ireland Ltd. v. Minister for Communications & Google Spain SL v. Agencia Española De Protección De Datos (C.J.E.U.)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2017
Extract
In April and May of 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), sitting as a Grand Chamber, issued two preliminary rulings with dramatic implications for internet privacy—a topic of increasing global concern following Edward Snowden’s leaks on the data surveillance programs run by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) and its allies. The first case, Digital Rights Ireland Ltd. v. Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and others joined with Kärtner Landesregierung and others, found an unacceptable interference in the rights to privacy and data protection in a European Union directive that required private telecom and internet companies to retain records of user activity and to make those records available for use by law enforcement. The second case, Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos and Mario Costeja González, recognized that there are situations where an internet search engine, such as Google, could be ordered to erase links from search results to protect individual privacy. While these two cases have dramatically different policy implications, both demonstrate Europe’s efforts to apply human rights to modern technology and to reconcile security, freedom of information, and privacy.
- Type
- International Legal Materials
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of International Law 2014
References
* This text was reproduced and reformatted from the text available at the Court of Justice of the European Union website (visited October 17, 2014), http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=150642&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=41538.
* This text was reproduced and reformatted from the text available at the Court of Justice of the European Union website (visited October 17, 2014), http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf;jsessionid=9ea7d0f130d5dd8862137e1941dca8d2e480 b9e3abd2.e34KaxiLc3eQc40LaxqMbN4OaNmNe0?text=&docid=152065&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=254809
1 See The NSA Files, The Guardian (June, 16, 2014, 3:24 PM), http://www.theguardian.com/world/the-nsa-files; NSA Secrets, The Washington Post (June 16, 2014, 3:29 PM), http://www.washingtonpost.com/nsa-secrets/.
2 Joined Cases C-293/12 & C-594/12, Digital Rights Ireland Ltd. v. Minister for Commc’n (Apr. 8, 2014), http://curia.europa. eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=150642&doclang=EN.
3 Case C-131/12, Google Spain SL v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (May 13, 2014), http://curia.europa. eu/juris/document/document.jsf?&docid=152065&doclang=EN.
4 Council Directive 2006/24/EC, On the Retention of Data Generated or Processed in Connection with the Provision of Publicly Available Electronic Communications Services or of Public Communications Networks 2006/24/EC, 2006 O.J (L105/54).
5 Matthias, Vierstraete, ECJ Declares the Data Retention Directive to be Invalid: What’s Next? , Datonomy (Apr. 9, 2014), http://blogs.olswang.com/datonomy/2014/04/09/ecj-declares-thedata-retention-directive-to-be-invalid-whats-next/ Google Scholar.
6 Glenn, Greenwald, NSA Collecting Phone Records of Millions of Verizon Customers Daily , The Guardian (June 5, 2013, 6:05 PM), http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order Google Scholar.
7 Alan, Travis & Charles, Arthur, EU Court Backs “Right to be Forgotten”: Google Must Amend Results on Request, The Guardian (May 13, 2014, 9:06 AM), http://www.theguardian. com/technology/2014/may/13/right-to-be-forgotten-eu-courtgoogle-search-results Google Scholar.
8 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union arts. 7–8, 2000 O.J. (C 364) 1 [hereinafter CFR].
9 Council Directive, On the Protection of Individuals with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data and on the Free Movement of Such Data 95/46/EC, 1995 O.J. (L 281) 31.
10 Digital Rights Ireland Ltd., supra note 2, ¶ 56–58.
11 Id. ¶ 60–62.
12 Id.¶ 59, 63–64.
13 Id. ¶ 28, 37. See also Case C-293/12, In re Digital Rights Ireland Ltd. v. Ireland, Opinion of Advocate General Cruz Villalón, ¶ 52 (Dec. 12, 2013), http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=145562&doclang=EN.
14 Digital Rights Ireland Ltd., supra note 2, ¶ 27.
15 Id. ¶ 32–36.
16 See Digital Rights Ireland Ltd., supra note 2, ¶ 42; CFR, supra note 8, art. 6.
17 Digital Rights Ireland Ltd., supra note 2, ¶ 69.
18 Id. ¶ 57, 60, 66.
19 Id. ¶ 63–64.
20 Id. ¶ 52.
21 Google Spain, supra note 3, ¶ 100(3).
22 Id.
23 Id. ¶ 80.
24 Id. ¶ 77.
25 Id. ¶ 100(4).
26 Id. ¶ 81.
27 Id. ¶ 100(4).
28 See Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, Report on the Telephone Records Program Conducted under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act and on the Operations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court 87 (2014), available at http://www.pclob.gov/SiteAssets/Pages/default/PCLOB-Report-on-the-Telephone-Records-Program.pdf; President’s Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies, Liberty and Security in a Changing World 144–45 (2013).
29 See, e.g., Complaint, Big Brother Watch and Others v. United Kingdom, App. No. 58170/13, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2013), available at https://www.privacynotprism.org.uk/assets/files/privacynotprism/496577_app_No_58170-13_BBW_ORG_EP_CK_v_UK_ Grounds.pdf.
30 The European Union is in the process of coming out with new reforms. See Press Release, European Commission, Progress on EU Data Protection Reform Now Irreversible Following European Parliament Vote (Mar. 12, 2014), http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-186_en.htm.