header-logo header-logo

GDPR ‘wave of litigation’

17 November 2017
Issue: 7770 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection
printer mail-detail

Research highlights the toxic legacy of personal data

More than 80% of jurisdictions predict an increase in compensation claims for data protection breaches when the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) takes effect next year, research shows.

The GDPR aims to harmonise EU data protection law, and is due to come into force across all 28 EU member states on 25 May 2018. It will bring higher financial sanctions, rights to compensation and group litigation mechanisms. It will apply to EU organisations and to any organisation based outside the EU offering goods or services to EU residents.

An 18-month study by DAC Beachcroft, Personal Data: the new oil and its toxic legacy under the General Data ProtectionRegulation, looks at the potential impact. Data protection experts across all 28 EU member states were asked whether they expected data protection litigation to rise, and most respondents agreed that compensation claims would increase. Claims will be spurred on because of mandatory reporting requirements, making data breaches more public than ever before, and rights to nominate not-for-profit organisations to make claims on individuals’ behalf.

‘While the fines and penalties under the GDPR have quite rightly grabbed the headlines, what might not be appreciated is the incoming wave of litigation that organisations face if they are found to contravene the GDPR’s new rules,’ said Hans Allnutt, partner at DAC Beachcroft.

‘The GDPR looks set to bring in a whole new phase of privacy litigation. We are living in a Big Data age where personal data is often described as the “new oil” because of the ease with which it can be collected and monitised. The GDPR places control back into the hands of the individual. Those organisations that have ridden the boom and aren’t ready may be hit hard from its toxic legacy under the GDPR.’

The report states that at least half of EU member states will, for the first time, be entitled to claim compensation for personal data breaches. Moreover, fines and compensation levels vary widely between EU countries, for example, Spain fined Facebook €1,200,000 in 2017, yet some data protection authorities do not have fine-issuing authority at all.

Issue: 7770 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection
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