How can we help?


Privacy Shield Declared Invalid by CJEU

The CJEU yesterday handed down its long-awaited decision on questions put to it regarding Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland and Maximillian Schrems (C-311/18) (Schrems 2).

It found that the transfer mechanism used to permit data transfers to the US under the EU-US Privacy Shield is invalid.

It also found that the use of standard contractual clauses, another mechanism used to permit transfers to countries outside the EEA, remains lawful, subject to assessments being conducted of the level of protection afforded in the recipient country.

For those that have been following the Schrems 2 case, its conclusion concerning the validity of Privacy Shield may have come as a bit of surprise.

The A-G’s advisory opinion to the Court on the Schrems 2 case issued in December 2019 did not specifically address the adequacy of the Privacy Shield regime, but focussed on questions concerning the standard contractual clauses.

Privacy Shield

The EU-US Privacy Shield was a compliance regime adopted by the EU in 2016 as an “adequacy decision” under Article 45 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This framework enabled EU organisations to transfer data to the US but only to US organisations which were registered with Privacy Shield.

The CJEU determined that certain domestic US laws which allowed surveillance by U.S intelligence services (including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, Executive Order 12333 and Presidential Policy Directive 28) did not provide for the required limits on the powers granted to intelligence agencies and non-US individuals would not have a right of redress in US courts for any  interference with their personal data. As a result, the Privacy Shield regime could not be sustained, and the previous decision made in 2016 was declared invalid.

Standard Contractual Clauses

Entry into the EU’s standard contractual clauses is not in and of itself enough to ensure that a transfer outside the EEA will be lawful.

Controllers that use SCCs must also ensure that:

  • they “take measures to compensate for the lack of data protection in a third country”;
  • there are safeguards ; and
  • there exists enforceable rights and effective remedies for the data subject (Article 46 (1)).

In light of the CJEU’s findings on the US laws discussed above, it is highly doubtful that the SCC’s can continue to be used as a lawful way of transferring personal data to the US.

The transfer mechanism used to permit data transfers to the US under the EU-US Privacy Shield is invalid.

What this means

Neither the Privacy Shield framework or potentially the SCCs should be relied upon to permit transfers of personal data to the US.

Apart from very limited circumstances permitted by Article 49 of the GDPR (such as where explicit consent is obtained for specified transfers or for “occasional” transfers necessary for implementation of pre-contractual measures or for performance of a contract) it now appears the majority of transfers from the EEA to US could be unlawful.

Organisations will be in a state of legal limbo until the EU introduces an alternative scheme or approves other measures to allow the continued lawful transfer of personal data to the US.

It remains to be seen what guidance supervisory authorities release to address the legal vacuum.

The ICO has already delivered a very short press statement last night stating that it is currently considering the judgment and that it stands ready to support UK organisations to ensure global data flows can continue and personal data is protected.

Our Privacy and Data Protection Team can provide advice and review of your organisation’s current methods of compliance and provide practical advice concerning what steps should be taken.

About this article

This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

  • 28 February 2024
  • Commercial Real Estate

Hidden risks in serviced office agreements

This is usually a fully furnished and equipped office space that is managed by a facility management company and made available for short-term or long-term rentals to businesses, varying from one week to a year, or even longer.

  • 27 February 2024
  • Employment

Changing Attitudes to Menopause

We have set out some answers to the frequently asked questions that employers ask when considering how to support a menopausal employee.

  • 22 February 2024
  • Employment

Time to take the heat off menopausal women

On 22 February 2024, the EHRC released guidance and resources for employers designed to help employers understand their legal obligations in relation to supporting workers experiencing menopausal symptoms.

  • 22 February 2024
  • Employment

Talking Employment Law: What to do if you’re at risk of redundancy

In this podcast, Harry Berryman and Rebecca Dowle, members of the employment team, will talk through the steps that need to be taken for a redundancy to be fair and the range of criteria that can be used when determining which employees will be made redundant.

  • 21 February 2024
  • Immigration

FAQs Partner Visa UK

Discover the UK Spouse Visa: eligibility, finances, relationship criteria, and the latest updates in 2024 for a successful application.

  • 19 February 2024
  • Privacy and Data Protection

The role of Data Protection Officers in ensuring compliance

How many of us receive marketing calls for products and services we did not sign up for?