header-logo header-logo

European Commission ponders next steps for UK-EU data flow

24 February 2021
Issue: 7922 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection , EU , Brexit
printer mail-detail
The European Commission has taken steps towards ensuring the flow of personal data between the UK and the rest of Europe can continue after the 30 June cut-off point.

The commission launched the process for two adequacy decisions for transfers of personal data to be adopted, one under the General Data Protection Regulation and the other for the Law Enforcement Directive. Next steps include gaining the approval of a committee of representatives of the EU member states.

Didier Reynders, commissioner for justice, said: ‘A flow of secure data between the EU and the UK is crucial to maintain close trade ties and cooperate effectively in the fight against crime.’

Currently, data flows between the UK and European Economic Area (EEA) courtesy of an interim regime established by the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, which is due to expire on 30 June 2021.

David Greene, president of the Law Society, said adoption of the two decisions ‘would be of significant benefit to our members and their clients.

‘Without formal adequacy recognition, UK organisations will need to have in place alternative safeguards to ensure they may continue to receive personal data from the EU and EEA, such as standard contractual clauses or another transfer mechanism. Until the adequacy decisions are adopted, we continue to advise the profession to continue to prepare in the event that adequacy is not approved by the EU.’

A report published by the Centre for European Reform (CER) this week highlighted the need for the UK government to try to reduce the risk of restrictions on the cross-border flow of data.

The report, ‘Keeping up appearances: what now for UK services trade?’, also called on the government to create a stable policy environment, liberalise its immigration regime and seek continued preferential access to the EU market where possible. This would help make the UK an attractive location in which multinational services firms can invest and establish themselves. 

Issue: 7922 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection , EU , Brexit
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll