首页 > 最新文献

European Review of Private Law最新文献

英文 中文
Google Spain from the Perspective of the ECtHR: Balancing Human Rights in the Digital Age ECtHR视角下的谷歌西班牙:数字时代的人权平衡
IF 0.3 Q4 LAW Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/erpl2022017
L. V. D. Meulen, Joshua Isaac Bishay, Pita Klaassen, Linde C.H.M.Verhoeven
{"title":"Google Spain from the Perspective of the ECtHR: Balancing Human Rights in the Digital Age","authors":"L. V. D. Meulen, Joshua Isaac Bishay, Pita Klaassen, Linde C.H.M.Verhoeven","doi":"10.54648/erpl2022017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2022017","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48686310","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The Right to Be Forgotten in the UK: A Case Note on the English and Welsh High Court Reasoning in NT1 & NT2 v. Google and the Post-Brexit Prospects in the GDPR era 英国的被遗忘权:英国和威尔士高等法院在NT1和NT2诉谷歌案中的推理案例说明以及GDPR时代的脱欧后前景
IF 0.3 Q4 LAW Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/erpl2022014
Eva Pander Maat, D. V. Maurik, Rosario Garza Islas, G. Piscitelli
The joined cases NT1 & NT2 present the first claim before the High Court of England and Wales (the Court) on the right to be forgotten, established by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the seminal Google Spain case. Both claimants, NT1 and NT2, had submitted a request for the de-listing of search results related to their prior criminal convictions. This case note considers how the Court was therefore faced with the question how to strike a balance between, on the one hand, the right to privacy, and, on the other hand, the publicity of criminal trials. In deciding upon this question, the Court notably weighed both EU and national law sources. It considered three main criteria: the nature of the offence, the public interest in the disclosure of the information concerned, and the rehabilitation of the claimant. This case note argues that the opposing conclusions reached in either of the joined cases are exemplary of the way these three criteria are embedded in the broader common law understanding of privacy and the concept of rehabilitation after criminal convictions. As regards the first criterion, on the nature of the offence, the joined cases suggest that if the offence does not involve dishonesty or is old and ‘not serious’, there is a greater chance that the Court does not consider it necessary for the information to remain public. As regards second criterion, on the public interest, it appears that if the claimant is active in public life in a manner related to the offences, this enhances the public interest in the information. Regarding the third criterion, on rehabilitation, it appears that the Court attaches great value to the concept of remorse for past convictions. The case note embeds these judicial considerations in the emphasis on ‘privileged principles of open justice’ in the English and Welsh common law jurisdiction, which have inhibited the post-war revolt to develop a strong right to privacy in civil law jurisdictions on the European continent. Finally, the case note reflects on post-Brexit data protection standards in England and Wales. Whilst assessing that courts will not be able to easily dismiss the relevance of CJEU case law on data protection, the case note identifies several stumbling blocks to lasting EU-UK equivalence on data protection laws and concludes that if anything, Brexit will diminish legal certainty for citizens and data subjects in England and Wales.
合并案件NT1和NT2向英格兰和威尔士高等法院(法院)提出了关于被遗忘权的第一项主张,该权利由欧盟法院(CJEU)在开创性的谷歌西班牙案中确立。NT1和NT2这两个索赔人都提交了一份请求,要求将与他们以前的刑事定罪有关的搜索结果除名。本案例说明考虑了法院因此如何面对如何在隐私权和刑事审判公开之间取得平衡的问题。在对这个问题作出裁决时,法院特别权衡了欧盟和国家法律来源。它考虑了三个主要标准:犯罪的性质、披露有关信息的公共利益以及索赔人的康复。本案例说明认为,在两个合并案件中得出的相反结论都是这三个标准嵌入普通法对隐私和刑事定罪后康复概念的更广泛理解的典范。关于第一个标准,即关于罪行的性质,合并的案件表明,如果罪行不涉及不诚实或是陈旧且“不严重”的,法院认为没有必要公开这些信息的可能性更大。关于第二个标准,关于公众利益,如果索赔人以与犯罪有关的方式活跃在公共生活中,这似乎会增强公众对信息的兴趣。关于关于改造的第三个标准,法院似乎非常重视对过去定罪的悔过概念。案例说明将这些司法考虑嵌入了英国和威尔士普通法管辖区对“公开司法的特权原则”的强调中,这抑制了战后在欧洲大陆大陆民法管辖区发展强大隐私权的反抗。最后,案例说明反映了英国脱欧后英格兰和威尔士的数据保护标准。在评估法院无法轻易否定CJEU判例法在数据保护方面的相关性的同时,该案例说明确定了欧盟与英国在数据保护法方面持久对等的几个障碍,并得出结论,如果有什么不同的话,英国脱欧将降低英格兰和威尔士公民和数据主体的法律确定性。
{"title":"The Right to Be Forgotten in the UK: A Case Note on the English and Welsh High Court Reasoning in NT1 & NT2 v. Google and the Post-Brexit Prospects in the GDPR era","authors":"Eva Pander Maat, D. V. Maurik, Rosario Garza Islas, G. Piscitelli","doi":"10.54648/erpl2022014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2022014","url":null,"abstract":"The joined cases NT1 & NT2 present the first claim before the High Court of England and Wales (the Court) on the right to be forgotten, established by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the seminal Google Spain case. Both claimants, NT1 and NT2, had submitted a request for the de-listing of search results related to their prior criminal convictions. This case note considers how the Court was therefore faced with the question how to strike a balance between, on the one hand, the right to privacy, and, on the other hand, the publicity of criminal trials. In deciding upon this question, the Court notably weighed both EU and national law sources. It considered three main criteria: the nature of the offence, the public interest in the disclosure of the information concerned, and the rehabilitation of the claimant. This case note argues that the opposing conclusions reached in either of the joined cases are exemplary of the way these three criteria are embedded in the broader common law understanding of privacy and the concept of rehabilitation after criminal convictions. As regards the first criterion, on the nature of the offence, the joined cases suggest that if the offence does not involve dishonesty or is old and ‘not serious’, there is a greater chance that the Court does not consider it necessary for the information to remain public. As regards second criterion, on the public interest, it appears that if the claimant is active in public life in a manner related to the offences, this enhances the public interest in the information. Regarding the third criterion, on rehabilitation, it appears that the Court attaches great value to the concept of remorse for past convictions. The case note embeds these judicial considerations in the emphasis on ‘privileged principles of open justice’ in the English and Welsh common law jurisdiction, which have inhibited the post-war revolt to develop a strong right to privacy in civil law jurisdictions on the European continent. Finally, the case note reflects on post-Brexit data protection standards in England and Wales. Whilst assessing that courts will not be able to easily dismiss the relevance of CJEU case law on data protection, the case note identifies several stumbling blocks to lasting EU-UK equivalence on data protection laws and concludes that if anything, Brexit will diminish legal certainty for citizens and data subjects in England and Wales.","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42546221","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The Right to Be Forgotten in Germany 德国的被遗忘权
IF 0.3 Q4 LAW Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/erpl2022015
Jan Smits Van Oyen, M. Lange, Solveig Kreinsen
{"title":"The Right to Be Forgotten in Germany","authors":"Jan Smits Van Oyen, M. Lange, Solveig Kreinsen","doi":"10.54648/erpl2022015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2022015","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42409674","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Introduction to the Case Note on the Right to Be Forgotten “被遗忘权”案例简介
IF 0.3 Q4 LAW Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/erpl2022012
J. Emaus
{"title":"Introduction to the Case Note on the Right to Be Forgotten","authors":"J. Emaus","doi":"10.54648/erpl2022012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2022012","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41994308","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Editorial: Das Recht auf Vergessenwerden 编辑:被遗忘的权利
IF 0.3 Q4 LAW Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/erpl2022010
A. Janssen
{"title":"Editorial: Das Recht auf Vergessenwerden","authors":"A. Janssen","doi":"10.54648/erpl2022010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2022010","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45556008","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Smart Property and Smart Contracts Under Spanish Law in the European Context 欧洲背景下西班牙法律下的智能财产和智能合约
IF 0.3 Q4 LAW Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/erpl2022011
Cristina Argelich Comelles
This article analyses the civil and registry implementation of smart property in real estate in Spain from a European perspective. To this end, a general theory is developed for smart property in real estate and transactional smart contracts, paying particular attention to remedies and property acquisition. Based on the remedies suggested by Nick Szabo in his formulation of smart contracts and smart property, such as the smart lien and the property club, other remedies adapted to our Law will be proposed, due to the ineffectiveness of Szabo’s remedies in the Spanish context. In this regard, attention will be paid to the types of acquisition of real rights, the validity and effectiveness of transactional smart contracts, the remedies for breach of contract, and the modifications to registration that these remedies require. Smart real estate requires the tokenization of property and the linking of the digital asset with the real asset. For this purpose, the functions of tokens and the remote control of real estate, the tokenization of real tradition, and the implementation of property technology (PropTech), in particular, the Internet of Things, will be addressed. Finally, blockchainization of the registry will be examined from the perspective of the Land Registry Interconnection and the Interoperability Model for Land Registers (IMOLA) platform in the EU and Alastria Blockchain Ecosystem in Spain, as well as its legal adaptations regarding registry qualification and registry effects in terms of adverse possession.
本文从欧洲的角度分析了西班牙房地产中智能财产的民事和登记实施情况。为此,为房地产和交易智能合约中的智能财产开发了一般理论,特别关注补救措施和财产收购。基于Nick Szabo在其制定智能合同和智能财产时提出的补救措施,例如智能留置权和财产俱乐部,由于Szabo的补救措施在西班牙背景下无效,将提出适合我国法律的其他补救措施。在这方面,将关注物权取得的类型,交易智能合约的有效性和有效性,违约的补救措施,以及这些补救措施所需的注册修改。智能房地产需要对财产进行标记化,并将数字资产与实物资产联系起来。为此,将讨论代币的功能和房地产的远程控制,真实传统的代币化以及财产技术(PropTech)的实施,特别是物联网。最后,将从欧盟的土地注册互联和土地注册互操作性模型(IMOLA)平台和西班牙的Alastria区块链生态系统的角度,以及其在登记资格和时效占有方面的登记效果方面的法律调整,来研究登记的区块链化。
{"title":"Smart Property and Smart Contracts Under Spanish Law in the European Context","authors":"Cristina Argelich Comelles","doi":"10.54648/erpl2022011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2022011","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses the civil and registry implementation of smart property in real estate in Spain from a European perspective. To this end, a general theory is developed for smart property in real estate and transactional smart contracts, paying particular attention to remedies and property acquisition. Based on the remedies suggested by Nick Szabo in his formulation of smart contracts and smart property, such as the smart lien and the property club, other remedies adapted to our Law will be proposed, due to the ineffectiveness of Szabo’s remedies in the Spanish context. In this regard, attention will be paid to the types of acquisition of real rights, the validity and effectiveness of transactional smart contracts, the remedies for breach of contract, and the modifications to registration that these remedies require. Smart real estate requires the tokenization of property and the linking of the digital asset with the real asset. For this purpose, the functions of tokens and the remote control of real estate, the tokenization of real tradition, and the implementation of property technology (PropTech), in particular, the Internet of Things, will be addressed. Finally, blockchainization of the registry will be examined from the perspective of the Land Registry Interconnection and the Interoperability Model for Land Registers (IMOLA) platform in the EU and Alastria Blockchain Ecosystem in Spain, as well as its legal adaptations regarding registry qualification and registry effects in terms of adverse possession.","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47828338","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Thoughts on Martijn W. Hesselink’s, Justifying Contract in Europe, Political Philosophies of European Contract Law 对海塞林克《欧洲契约的正当化:欧洲合同法的政治哲学》的思考
IF 0.3 Q4 LAW Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/erpl2022018
H. Micklitz
{"title":"Thoughts on Martijn W. Hesselink’s, Justifying Contract in Europe, Political Philosophies of European Contract Law","authors":"H. Micklitz","doi":"10.54648/erpl2022018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2022018","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46680807","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Google v. CNIL: A Commentary on the Territorial Scope of the Right to Be Forgotten 谷歌诉CNIL:被遗忘权的地域范围述评
IF 0.3 Q4 LAW Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/erpl2022013
Eva Pander Maat
This case note reflects on the question of the territorial scope of the right to be forgotten (RTBF). This question was addressed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the recent Google v. Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (CNIL) case, in which the French Data Protection Authority (DPA) sought to establish the obligation for internet search engines (ISEs) to delist search results in all versions of their search engine. In its September 2019 judgment, the Court did not grant CNIL’s request. However, although EU law does not currently oblige ISEs to delist search results from all versions of their search engine, the Court crucially emphasized that DPAs remain competent to order global delisting. Accordingly, the territorial scope of the RTBF is in principle regional, but may on a case-by-case basis also be national or global where the exercise of balancing fundamental rights so requires. Like the internet, the territorial scope of the RTBF thus appears to be fluid. This case note discusses the Google v. CNIL case from two angles. First, the RTBF entails the exercise of balancing fundamental rights between the right to privacy and the freedom of expression. The RTBF is thereby exemplary of the EU’s privacy-oriented data protection laws, which diverge from more expression-oriented data protection laws outside of the EU. This divergence is concerning for the normative foundation and the feasibility of a global RTBF. Second, the RTBF places a private enforcement obligation upon ISEs, which raises rule of law concerns. Although a global scope is assumed to increase the effectiveness of the RTBF, it would similarly incur an amplification of the existing challenges with its enforcement. This case note establishes that the judgment in the Google v. CNIL case, more so than the January 2019 opinion by Advocate- General Szpunar, actively engages with this complex legal environment and the arguments raised. Notwithstanding this, the disparity between the argumentation of the Court and the AG and the questions left open in the judgment reveal that the territorial scope of the RTBF will remain a contentious topic for many years to come.
本案件说明反映了被遗忘权的领土范围问题。欧洲法院(ECJ)在最近的谷歌诉国家信息和自由自由委员会(CNIL)案中解决了这一问题,在该案中,法国数据保护局(DPA)试图规定互联网搜索引擎(ISEs)有义务在其所有版本的搜索引擎中删除搜索结果。在2019年9月的判决中,法院没有批准CNIL的请求。然而,尽管欧盟法律目前并未强制互联网搜索机构从其所有版本的搜索引擎中删除搜索结果,但法院至关重要地强调,数据处理机构仍有权下令在全球范围内删除搜索结果。因此,国境边界框架的领土范围原则上是区域性的,但在个案基础上也可在行使平衡基本权利的需要时是全国性或全球性的。因此,与互联网一样,RTBF的地域范围似乎是可变的。本案例笔记从两个角度讨论谷歌诉CNIL案。首先,《基本人权法》要求在隐私权和言论自由之间行使平衡基本权利。因此,RTBF是欧盟以隐私为导向的数据保护法的典范,它不同于欧盟以外以表达为导向的数据保护法。这种分歧关系到全球RTBF的规范基础和可行性。其次,RTBF将私人强制执行的义务强加给国际组织,这引起了对法治的担忧。虽然假定全球范围可以提高RTBF的效力,但它同样会扩大其执行方面的现有挑战。本案件说明确定,谷歌诉CNIL案的判决比Szpunar总辩护律师2019年1月的意见更积极地参与了这一复杂的法律环境和提出的论点。尽管如此,法院和总检察长的论点之间的差异以及判决中未解决的问题表明,在今后许多年里,RTBF的领土范围仍将是一个有争议的话题。
{"title":"Google v. CNIL: A Commentary on the Territorial Scope of the Right to Be Forgotten","authors":"Eva Pander Maat","doi":"10.54648/erpl2022013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2022013","url":null,"abstract":"This case note reflects on the question of the territorial scope of the right to be forgotten (RTBF). This question was addressed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the recent Google v. Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (CNIL) case, in which the French Data Protection Authority (DPA) sought to establish the obligation for internet search engines (ISEs) to delist search results in all versions of their search engine. In its September 2019 judgment, the Court did not grant CNIL’s request. However, although EU law does not currently oblige ISEs to delist search results from all versions of their search engine, the Court crucially emphasized that DPAs remain competent to order global delisting. Accordingly, the territorial scope of the RTBF is in principle regional, but may on a case-by-case basis also be national or global where the exercise of balancing fundamental rights so requires. Like the internet, the territorial scope of the RTBF thus appears to be fluid. This case note discusses the Google v. CNIL case from two angles. First, the RTBF entails the exercise of balancing fundamental rights between the right to privacy and the freedom of expression. The RTBF is thereby exemplary of the EU’s privacy-oriented data protection laws, which diverge from more expression-oriented data protection laws outside of the EU. This divergence is concerning for the normative foundation and the feasibility of a global RTBF. Second, the RTBF places a private enforcement obligation upon ISEs, which raises rule of law concerns. Although a global scope is assumed to increase the effectiveness of the RTBF, it would similarly incur an amplification of the existing challenges with its enforcement. This case note establishes that the judgment in the Google v. CNIL case, more so than the January 2019 opinion by Advocate- General Szpunar, actively engages with this complex legal environment and the arguments raised. Notwithstanding this, the disparity between the argumentation of the Court and the AG and the questions left open in the judgment reveal that the territorial scope of the RTBF will remain a contentious topic for many years to come.","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43203998","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
A Dutch Perspective on the ‘Right to Be Forgotten’ An Analysis of Dutch Lower Court Judgments in Light of the Hoge Raad Judgment of 24 February 2017 and the Costeja Judgment “被遗忘权”的荷兰视角——从2017年2月24日的Hoge Raad判决和Costeja判决分析荷兰下级法院的判决
IF 0.3 Q4 LAW Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/erpl2022016
Sits Schreurs, Nena Van Der Kammen, Sofie Oosterhuis
{"title":"A Dutch Perspective on the ‘Right to Be Forgotten’ An Analysis of Dutch Lower Court Judgments in Light of the Hoge Raad Judgment of 24 February 2017 and the Costeja Judgment","authors":"Sits Schreurs, Nena Van Der Kammen, Sofie Oosterhuis","doi":"10.54648/erpl2022016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2022016","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42260083","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Open Banking: Gordian Legal Knots in the Uncomfortable Cohabitation between the PSD2 and the GDPR 开放银行:PSD2和GDPR之间令人不安的共存中的棘手法律问题
IF 0.3 Q4 LAW Pub Date : 2022-03-01 DOI: 10.54648/erpl2022004
Federico Ferretti
This work analyses problems in the legal framework of Open Banking enabled by the Payment Services Directive 2 (PSD2). It goes through the role of EU law in the regulation of payment services up to their transition towards digitalization and fintech, to show the scale of the changes brought by the PSD2 in a territory unfamiliar to traditional banking. The resulting conflation between banking and the data economy reveal a brand-new market. The normative intersection between the PSD2 and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) expose not only poor coordination but also a growing entanglement of legal knots. The legal inconsistencies, loopholes, and interpretative difficulties are examined to expose operational risks beyond difficulties of legal technicism. A rethinking, or at least a correction, of the European regime of Open Banking is necessary to reconcile the needs of an emerging market and the protection of its users.
这项工作分析了由支付服务指令2 (PSD2)启用的开放银行法律框架中的问题。它回顾了欧盟法律在支付服务监管中的作用,以及它们向数字化和金融科技的过渡,以展示PSD2在一个传统银行业不熟悉的领域带来的巨大变化。银行业与数据经济的结合揭示了一个全新的市场。PSD2和通用数据保护条例(GDPR)之间的规范性交集不仅暴露了缺乏协调,而且还暴露了越来越多的法律纠纷。分析了法律的不一致、漏洞和解释困难,揭示了法律技术困难之外的操作风险。要协调新兴市场的需求和对其用户的保护,有必要对欧洲的开放银行(Open Banking)制度进行反思,或至少进行修正。
{"title":"Open Banking: Gordian Legal Knots in the Uncomfortable Cohabitation between the PSD2 and the GDPR","authors":"Federico Ferretti","doi":"10.54648/erpl2022004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/erpl2022004","url":null,"abstract":"This work analyses problems in the legal framework of Open Banking enabled by the Payment Services Directive 2 (PSD2). It goes through the role of EU law in the regulation of payment services up to their transition towards digitalization and fintech, to show the scale of the changes brought by the PSD2 in a territory unfamiliar to traditional banking. The resulting conflation between banking and the data economy reveal a brand-new market. The normative intersection between the PSD2 and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) expose not only poor coordination but also a growing entanglement of legal knots. The legal inconsistencies, loopholes, and interpretative difficulties are examined to expose operational risks beyond difficulties of legal technicism. A rethinking, or at least a correction, of the European regime of Open Banking is necessary to reconcile the needs of an emerging market and the protection of its users.","PeriodicalId":43736,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Private Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49014206","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
European Review of Private Law
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
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