header-logo header-logo

Brexit brainstorming: data privacy

09 June 2016 / Mark Surguy , Lauren Grest
Issue: 7702 / Categories: Features , Brexit , Profession , Data protection
printer mail-detail
nlj_7702_grest

The idea of Brexit being a business-friendly dream may not hold up to the reality as Lauren Grest & Mark Surguy explain

The timing of the Brexit referendum has coincided with a tumultuous period for EU data legislation. First was the shock dissolution of the Safe Harbor agreement, then the draft of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was released and the proposed EU-US Privacy shield is still being debated by the Article 29 Working Group. With the threat of Britain exiting the EU, this adds another layer of uncertainty for businesses and law firms who rely on or need to transfer electronic data.

The most pressing data protection implication of a Brexit centres on the GDPR. Unlike the incumbent Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC which has to be implemented by each member state but may result in inconsistency between states, the GDPR will apply uniformly across all EU member states, with the aim of harmonising data protection laws as well as offering increased data protection measures for EU citizens. Should the UK leave

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll