International Jurisdiction over Crossborder Private Enforcement Actions under the GDPR

Lydia Lundstedt
{"title":"International Jurisdiction over Crossborder Private Enforcement Actions under the GDPR","authors":"Lydia Lundstedt","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3159854","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The new European Union (EU) Regulation on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (hereinafter “General Data Protection Regulation or “GDPR”) aims to strengthen individual rights for the protection of personal data by, inter alia, facilitating private enforcement actions. To this end, the GDPR clarifies the data subject’s right to a direct and independent private enforcement action directly against the controller or processer. As the infringement of personal data rights increasingly takes on cross border dimensions, the GDPR sets out rules on jurisdiction allowing the data subject to bring a private enforcement action in the Member State where the offending controller or processor has its establishment, or alternatively in the Member State where the data subject has his or her habitual residence. \nThe aim of this article is to analyze the jurisdictional options available to a data subject to bring a private enforcement action to enforce his/her data protection rights before the GDPR, under the Member States’ general rules on jurisdiction in private international law, and after the GDPR, under the GDPR’s own rules on jurisdiction. In addition, the article analyzes whether the new rules on jurisdiction in the GDPR supplement or supplant the Member States’ general rules on jurisdiction. The article discusses and analyzes the areas where the application and interpretation of the rules are unclear, and proposes interpretations that best serve the objectives of the GDPR to strengthen the rights of data subjects by facilitating private enforcement actions without jeopardizing the principle of legal certainty deemed necessary for the free movement of data within the EU.","PeriodicalId":82658,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian studies in law","volume":"65 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.3159854","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian studies in law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3159854","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The new European Union (EU) Regulation on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (hereinafter “General Data Protection Regulation or “GDPR”) aims to strengthen individual rights for the protection of personal data by, inter alia, facilitating private enforcement actions. To this end, the GDPR clarifies the data subject’s right to a direct and independent private enforcement action directly against the controller or processer. As the infringement of personal data rights increasingly takes on cross border dimensions, the GDPR sets out rules on jurisdiction allowing the data subject to bring a private enforcement action in the Member State where the offending controller or processor has its establishment, or alternatively in the Member State where the data subject has his or her habitual residence. The aim of this article is to analyze the jurisdictional options available to a data subject to bring a private enforcement action to enforce his/her data protection rights before the GDPR, under the Member States’ general rules on jurisdiction in private international law, and after the GDPR, under the GDPR’s own rules on jurisdiction. In addition, the article analyzes whether the new rules on jurisdiction in the GDPR supplement or supplant the Member States’ general rules on jurisdiction. The article discusses and analyzes the areas where the application and interpretation of the rules are unclear, and proposes interpretations that best serve the objectives of the GDPR to strengthen the rights of data subjects by facilitating private enforcement actions without jeopardizing the principle of legal certainty deemed necessary for the free movement of data within the EU.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
GDPR下跨境私人执法行动的国际管辖权
新的欧盟(EU)关于在个人数据处理方面保护自然人和关于此类数据自由流动的条例,以及废除指令95/46/EC(以下简称“一般数据保护条例”或“GDPR”)旨在通过促进私人执法行动,加强个人权利以保护个人数据。为此,GDPR明确了数据主体直接针对控制者或处理者采取直接和独立的私人执法行动的权利。随着对个人数据权利的侵犯越来越多地呈现跨境维度,GDPR规定了关于管辖权的规则,允许数据主体在违规控制者或处理者设立机构的成员国提起私人执法行动,或者在数据主体经常居住的成员国提起私人执法行动。本文的目的是分析数据主体在GDPR之前,根据成员国关于国际私法管辖权的一般规则,以及在GDPR之后,根据GDPR自己的管辖权规则,提起私人执法行动以行使其数据保护权利的管辖权选择。此外,本文还分析了GDPR中关于管辖权的新规则是对成员国关于管辖权的一般规则的补充还是替代。本文讨论和分析了规则的适用和解释不明确的领域,并提出了最好地服务于GDPR目标的解释,通过促进私人执法行动来加强数据主体的权利,同时又不损害被认为是欧盟内部数据自由流动所必需的法律确定性原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
“Regular Powers are No Longer Enough” – Checks and Balances in Declaring a State of Emergency according to the Constitution of Finland Is There a Swedish Constitutional Exceptionalism? A Legal Historical Approach to the Rules on the Distribution of Legislative Competence and the Question of Private or Public Europeanisation The Council of Europe in Defence of Democracy. Some Reflections Following the Reykjavik Summit 2023
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1