Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • apa.csl
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Schrems III eller en nya era för dataöverföringar? - EU:s rättighetsskydd i förhållande till statliga övervakningsintressen
Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Karlstad Business School (from 2013).
2023 (Swedish)Independent thesis Advanced level (professional degree), 20 credits / 30 HE creditsStudent thesisAlternative title
Schrems III or a new era for data transfers? - EU protection for fundamental rights in relation to state surveillance interests (English)
Abstract [en]

The task of the GDPR is to regulate the flow of personal data in order to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals. In the case of a transfer of personal data to a third country, there is a specific regulation in which the Union imposes requirements on the legal order of the receiving country and whether it complies with the requirements of Union law. The rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Schrems I and II brought the regime for the transfer of personal data to third countries to a head and examined the circumstances under which a transfer of personal data from the EU to the US may take place. The court annulled the regulation in the area at the time, which created a legal vacuum. Earlier this year, the two parties presented a new regulation on how such a transfer may take place, which also forms the framework for the purpose of the petition, which is thus to examine and analyze whether the new framework meets the protection requirements set by EU law.

In the case of third-country transfers of personal data, the recipient country must meet several protection requirements arising from the GDPR. The Commission decides whether the third country in question provides an adequate level of protection, based on several criteria. The Commission shall consider both the national regulations of the country and the possibilities for the individual to obtain a judicial review. The country's legal order must not, in a too wide sense, restrict the rights and freedoms of Union law. One circumstance that risks cases beyond the permissible limitation is surveillance by state intelligence. However, certain rights and freedoms under EU law are not absolute and may be restricted. The right to privacy and the protection of personal data constitutes two of them. To restrict the aforementioned, a proportionality assessment must be carried out. In Schrems I and II, the court was tasked with assessing whether the U.S. regulation could be considered proportionate. The Court held that the regulation in question constituted too extensive a restriction on the rights and freedoms of the Union citizen. In addition, no judicial review was guaranteed under the Charter and the adequacy decision that existed was annulled.

Earlier this year, a framework was presented that gives a first indication of what a new adequacy decision may contain. The new regulation emphasizes how the collection of personal data through intelligence activities in the form of surveillance programmes must take place in the light of proportionate and necessary considerations. In addition to the principles, a legal remedy is established to give the individual Union citizen the opportunity to redress if he or she considers that his or her rights and freedoms have been violated. Both a safety representative and a data protection court can hear such a complaint. Through Schrems I and II the Court outlined what constitutes the core - the essential content - of rights and freedoms within data protection regulation. However, the reasoning has gradually been criticized for the court's ambiguity and non-specification of the aforementioned. This, in turn, influences a new EU-US adequacy decision. The new regulations thus seemingly meet the protection requirements identified by the court during a review of the presidential order, however, it remains unclear whether its substantial content has changed. Nevertheless, a retrial by the Court of Justice of the EU remains to be seen whether they agree with the Commission's assessment.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2023. , p. 67
Keywords [en]
Dataskyddsförordningen, överföring av personuppgifter, tredjeland, Schrems
National Category
Law (excluding Law and Society)
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kau:diva-93288OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kau-93288DiVA, id: diva2:1734679
Educational program
Juristprogrammet, 270 ECTS
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2023-02-07 Created: 2023-02-06 Last updated: 2023-02-07Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

By organisation
Karlstad Business School (from 2013)
Law (excluding Law and Society)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 348 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • apa.csl
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf