Search

How can we help?

Icon

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.

Disclaimer
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.

Author profile

About this article

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

art
  • 09 October 2026
  • Employment

Neurodiversity, probation and unfair dismissal: What employers need to know

The next few years are introducing landmark changes to employment law in the UK, under the Employment Rights Act 2025. Part of these changes include the amendments to rights to unfair dismissal, reducing the qualifying period for this right to six months.

art
  • 08 October 2026
  • Commercial Real Estate

Packing up rate mitigation – The end of ‘box shifting’?

What is box shifting and how does it affect property owners and tenants? We examine the Court of Appeal’s decision in City of London v 48th Street Holdings and its implications for intermittent occupation, business rates and lease arrangements.

art
  • 30 September 2026

Clarkslegal celebrates strong results in the Legal 500 UK 2027

Clarkslegal would like to thank its clients for the outstanding feedback that contributed to the firm’s recognition in the Legal 500 UK Solicitors 2027 Guide. We are proud to be recognised across five key practice areas: Litigation, Property, Corporate & Commercial, Employment, and Immigration.

art
  • 29 September 2026
  • Employment

New bereavement leave rights for pregnancy loss

The Government have announced that in April 2027 they will be introducing a new right to bereavement leave to include those who suffer pregnancy loss before 24 weeks. This has been announced in their response to their consultation on bereavement leave “Make Work Pay: Leave for bereavement including pregnancy loss”.

art
  • 25 September 2026
  • Employment

Consultation response on duty to inform workers of right to join a union

The Employment Rights Act 2025, makes it a requirement for employers to inform workers of their right to join a trade union at the same time as the Section 1 particulars are issued to them and at subsequent times. The details of this new duty are to be provided in regulations.

art
  • 24 September 2026
  • Public Procurement

Procurement challenges: What documents and information are bidders entitled to?

A tricky feature of public procurement challenges for unsuccessful bidders is that contracting authorities usually hold all the cards. When the outcome of a tender conducted under the Procurement Act 2023 has been decided, authorities must provide bidders with an Assessment Summary containing their scores for each of the award criteria and those of the successful bidder and an explanation for those scores.