On 27 February 2020, the UK government unofficially announced that the UK will not participate in the Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court system. The decision was confirmed by a spokesperson for the prime minister, who stated that “Participating in a court that applies EU law and bound by the CJEU is inconsistent with

Responding to a written question put to the UK Parliament on 21 January 2020, Government Minister Chris Skidmore stated that the UK has no plans to implement the controversial new EU Copyright Directive following the UK’s exit from the European Union. Entering into force in June 2019, EU countries have been given until June 2021

Brexit is finally here. The United Kingdom leaves the European Union on 31 January 2020. The EU and the UK will now enter a transition period which is scheduled to last until 31 December 2020. During this time, the UK will continue to abide by the EU laws, be subject to the rulings of EU courts, and contribute to the EU budget. Hence, the status quo will essentially remain unchanged during the transition period. The aim of the transition period is to provide enough time for the final wave of negotiations between the UK and EU to
Continue Reading

In its second statement of intent of the week, on 9 July 2019, the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) announced its intention to fine Marriott International, Inc (“Marriott”) £99.2m under the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) for a personal data breach that occurred in relation to the Starwood guest reservation database system.
Continue Reading

The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) today (8 July 2019) announced its intention to fine British Airways (“BA”) £183.39m under the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) for a personal data breach. This is the highest fine issued so far by a European Union data protection supervisory authority for a personal data breach under the GDPR.
Continue Reading

In banking, open data, a common pool of customer data that can be freely used and redistributed by anyone, could provide a number of benefits to customers and could increase competition in banking in the UK as well as in other jurisdictions. For example, open data could be used to improve the ability to make effective decisions about the use and management of money, or enable comparison applications to make more detailed and accurate assessments of how customers can save money.
Continue Reading

Any digital record of bank deposits opens up the possibility that its underlying set of data may be copied and that the nominal amount deposited may be spent more than once. With conventional bank deposits, banks monitor the digital records and are trusted to ensure their validity. With so-called “digital currencies” like Bitcoin, by contrast, the ledger containing the record of all transactions by all users is available to the public. Rather than requiring users to have trust in a central third party, reliance is placed upon the network and the algorithmic rules established to reliably change the ledger. The authentication technologies underpinning Bitcoin – known as distributed ledger or Blockchain-technologies – enable multiple instances of data to be synchronized and updated.
Continue Reading

The final draft of the new European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was agreed on 15 December 2015 and, once it has been approved by the European Parliament in early 2016, is expected to take effect by early 2018. This reform aims to update data protection law to address the challenges of the digital age while simultaneously protecting the rights of individuals and enabling businesses to utilise personal data in a more consistent manner across the European Union. The GDPR will be directly applicable in the same form in all EU Member States with the intention of reducing the burden on international organisations that, up until now, have had to vary their compliance to satisfy the particular data protection requirements of each Member State.
Continue Reading

In its judgment of 6 October 2015 (C-362/14), the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) held that transfers of personal data of European citizens to the United States made under the so-called Safe Harbor scheme are subject to significant risks, and declared the corresponding decision of the European Commission to be invalid. As a consequence, EU entities of U.S. companies so far relying on Safe Harbor will need to revise their practice of submitting personal data to the U.S. to comply with EU data protection law.
Continue Reading