Articles

European Data Protection Board provides welcoming guidance on the territorial scope of the GDPR

European Data Protection Board provides welcoming guidance on the ter

European Data Protection Board provides welcoming guidance on the territorial scope of the GDPR

24.01.2019 EU law

“If personal data of a Korean employee working for a U.S. company is processed in the HR department in London, does the GDPR apply?” “Is the GPDR applicable to a Dutch customer visiting the website of a Canadian company?”

This and many other similar questions are often raised in practice. The territorial scope of application of the GDPR can be a mind-boggling exercise. The territorial applicability of the GDPR is however the first step that needs to be conducted in the GDPR analysis. Aware of the need for guidance on this topic, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”, the former “Article 29 Working Party”) has published its “Guidelines 3/2018 on the territorial scope of the GDPR (Article 3)” on 16 November 2018, adapted on 12 November 2019 after public consultation. With these Guidelines, the EDPB focusses on a harmonious interpretation and uniform application of article 3 GDPR by companies active on the EU market, in order to ensure a comprehensive protection of the rights of data subjects in the EU. The EDPB underlines that the application of article 3 aims at determining whether a particular processing activity, rather than a natural person or legal entity itself, falls within the territorial scope of the GDPR. Consequently, certain processing activities by a controller or processor might fall within the scope of the GDPR, while other processing activities might not, depending on the processing activity.

By referring to existing case law of the CJEU and other European legislation, the EDPB extensively interprets the two criteria of article 3 GDPR: i) the establishment criterion, as set out in article 3 (1) GDPR; and ii) the targeting criterion, as set out in article 3 (2) GDPR. In short, the establishment criterion determines whether an entity is sufficiently rooted within the EU, regardless of whether the processing takes place in the EU or not. Any real and effective activity, even a minimal one, in the context of the entity’s activities can be enough to satisfy the establishment criterion. The targeting criterion, on the other hand, sets out whether the GDPR applies when personal data of data subjects in the EU are processed while offering goods or services to the data subjects, or when their behavior in the EU is monitored.

When either the establishment criterion or the targeting criterion is met, the provisions of the GDPR will apply to the relevant entity for that processing activity in question. Also the processing in a place where Member State Law applies by virtue of public international law (article 3 (3) GDPR) has been touched upon shortly.

Aware of the complexity of the issue given the worldwide data flows and international (e-)businesses, the EDPB stresses the importance of an analysis based on the specific situation. The EDPB develops a multifold approach in determining whether or not one of the two above criteria is applicable and provides many practical examples. In addition, the EDPB has also set out different paths for data controllers and data processors, whether or not in the EU, as the processing by each entity must be considered separately. Lastly, the EDPB also provides clarification on the process for the designation of a representative within the EU for non-EU companies, as set out in article 27 GDPR.

The link to the Guidelines can be found here.

Team

Related news

22.07.2021 NL law
Towards a European legal framework for the development and use of Artificial Intelligence

Short Reads - Back in 2014, Stephen Hawking said, “The development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race.” Although the use of artificial intelligence is nothing new and dates back to Alan Turing (the godfather of computational theory), prominent researchers – along with Stephen Hawking – have expressed their concerns about the unregulated use of AI systems and their impact on society as we know it.

Read more

19.07.2021 BE law
One year of Schrems II: a state of affairs for international data transfers

Articles - International data transfers have been the subject of intense debates ever since the Court of Justice issued its landmark judgement of Schrems I, on 6 October 2015. The intensity of the debate was further reinforced since the Schrems II decision one year ago, on 16 July 2020. The decision annulled the U.S. Privacy Shield and severely tightened the rules on the use of standard contractual clauses (“SCCs”).

Read more

18.05.2021 NL law
Kroniek: De bestuursrechtelijke aspecten van de AVG

Articles - Tom Barkhuysen, Steven Bastiaans en Fatma Çapkurt (Universiteit Leiden) schreven samen de eerste editie van de nieuwe jaarlijkse NTB kroniek: de bestuursrechtelijke aspecten van de AVG. Hierin bespreken zij onder meer de meest relevante (bestuursrechtelijke) jurisprudentie van het afgelopen jaar op het gebied van de AVG.

Read more

18.06.2021 NL law
FAQ: Wat houdt het Wetsvoorstel elektronische gegevensuitwisseling in de zorg (Wegiz) in en wat is de verhouding tot de AVG?

Short Reads - (Digitale) gegevensuitwisseling in de zorg is een actueel thema. Illustratief is een item bij EenVandaag van april 2021 waarin de analoge werkwijze bij gegevensuitwisseling in de zorg wordt aangekaart, maar ook dit artikel in het NRC van afgelopen maand waarin verslag werd gedaan van een datalek waardoor duizenden gevoelige patiëntgegevens op straat kwamen te liggen. 

Read more

04.05.2021 NL law
Participatie en privacyregels: hoe te combineren onder de Omgevingswet?

Short Reads - In het stelsel van de Omgevingswet (Ow) is een belangrijke rol bedacht voor participatie bij de totstandkoming van besluiten. Het beoogde resultaat: tijdig belangen, meningen en creativiteit op tafel krijgen en daarmee een groter draagvlak en kwalitatief betere besluitvorming bereiken. Door een grotere betrokkenheid van meer personen gaan overheden en initiatiefnemers ook meer persoonsgegevens verwerken. Dit brengt privacyrisico’s met zich mee. Wat regelt de Ow op het gebied van privacy, de verwerking van persoonsgegevens en datagebruik?

Read more