Skip to content

The search returned 31 results.

Immigration Exemption and the European Convention on Human Rights journal article

Matthew White

European Data Protection Law Review, Volume 5 (2019), Issue 1, Page 26 - 42

The European Union has introduced the General Data Protection Regulation to reform and update data protection laws across Member States. To comply, the United Kingdom has introduced the Data Protection Act 2018. This article focuses on one schedule of the new Act, a data protection exemption for effective immigration control purposes. Considering that the UK Parliament has not implemented the Charter of Fundamental Rights into domestic law post-Brexit, it is therefore necessary to consider this exemption under the European Convention on Human Rights. Recital 73 of the Regulation requires any restrictions on the protection of personal data to be compatible with the Convention. In concluding that the exemption is incompatible with the Convention, this will highlight that not only would the UK be failing their existing human rights obligations but also raises concerns about the UK’s adequacy status as a third country post-Brexit. Keywords: Immigration, Exemptions, Article 8 ECHR, Effective Remedy, Discrimination

Challenging the EU's ‘Right to Be Forgotten’? Society's ‘Right to Know’ in Japan journal article

Frederike Zufall

European Data Protection Law Review, Volume 5 (2019), Issue 1, Page 17 - 25

This article asks the extent to which the concept of the ‘right to be forgotten’ has been received by Japanese law – or whether, to the contrary, Japan is challenging the EU's concept. In a 2017 judgment, the Japanese Supreme Court rejected a request for injunctive relief to delete search results from the search engine Google. The decisive argument focused on the public interest around the facts concerned: a crime committed by the applicant several years earlier. The court did not just award the right to freedom of expression to Google, but centred its decision on society's right to know – thereby putting society's interest before that of the individual. In the light of the pending adoption of the EU-Japan adequacy decision, this divergence from the EU concept raises doubts as to whether 'adequacy' can be achieved between legal systems founded on cultural differences. Can we still afford to base our legal regimes on different social consciousness in the era of a borderless Internet? Keywords: Data Protection Law, Japan, Right to Be Forgotten, Adequacy Decision

Tort and Data Protection Law: journal article

Are There Any Lessons to Be Learnt?

Leon Trakman, Robert Walters, Bruno Zeller

European Data Protection Law Review, Volume 5 (2019), Issue 4, Page 500 - 519

The development and evolution of data protection law is not fully realised. One challenge that has emerged is the recognition of a tort for violating a person’s personal information contrary to data protection law. The issue is that courts have found it difficult to determine and assess the harm caused to the data subject. The courts in the United Kingdom (UK) and Canada have recently developed a tort for infringing privacy in personal data. What has emerged is that courts in those two countries have begun to establish some key principles to underpin a tort violating privacy, by providing guidance on measuring the ensuing harm. That tort is also developing in the United States. This article argues that other common law jurisdictions, notably Australia, should consider going down the same pathway, by establishing a privacy tort over the Internet. Such a tort in data protection will provide a higher level of control to data subjects over their personal data and deter entities from misusing that data. However, that tort may fail to protect data subjects from the misuse of their personal data if the law requires harm to eventuate, as is required by the tradition tort of privacy. This must be considered with caution because, unlike traditional notions of a tort in privacy, a privacy violation of over the Internet may take weeks, months or years to identify. Contrarily, tort law has been effective in reducing and deterring negligence in privacy related cases, strengthening the rationale for a tort in personal data over the Internet. Keywords: Australia, Data Protection, European Union, Personal Data, Tort, United Kingdom

Artificial Intelligence in Medical Diagnoses and the Right to Explanation journal article

Thomas Hoeren, Maurice Niehoff

European Data Protection Law Review, Volume 4 (2018), Issue 3, Page 308 - 319

Artificial intelligence and automation is also finding its way into the healthcare sector with some systems even claiming to deliver better results than human physicians. However, the increasing automation of medical decision-making is also accompanied by problems, as the question of how the relationship of trust between physicians and patients can be maintained or how decisions can be verified. This is where the right to explanation comes into play, which is enshrined in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This article explains how the right is derived from the GDPR and how it should be established. Keywords: Data Protection, Privacy, AI, Articial Intelligence, Algorithm

Machine Learning for Diagnosis and Treatment: journal article

Gymnastics for the GDPR

Robin Pierce

European Data Protection Law Review, Volume 4 (2018), Issue 3, Page 333 - 343

Machine Learning (ML), a form of artificial intelligence (AI) that produces iterative refinement of outputs without human intervention, is gaining traction in healthcare as a promising way of streamlining diagnosis and treatment and is even being explored as a more efficient alternative to clinical trials. ML is increasingly being identified as an essential tool in the arsenal of Big Data for medicine. ML can process and analyse the data resulting in outputs that can inform treatment and diagnosis. Consequently, ML is likely to occupy a central role in precision medicine, an approach that tailors treatment based on characteristics of individual patients instead of traditional ‘average’ or one-size-fits-all medicine, potentially optimising outcomes as well as resource allocation. ML falls into a category of data-reliant technologies that have the potential to enhance healthcare in significant ways. However, as such, concerns about data protection and the GDPR may arise as ML assumes a growing role in healthcare, prompting questions about the extent to which the GDPR and related legislation will be able to provide adequate data protection for data subjects. Focusing on issues of transparency, fairness, storage limitation, purpose limitation and data minimisation as well as specific provisions supporting these principles, this article examines the interaction between ML and data protection law. Keywords: Machine Learning, GDPR, Data Protection, Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, Health Data, Automated Processing, Data Minimisation

Improving Consent in Information Privacy through Autonomy-Preserving Protective Measures (APPMs) journal article

Luiza Jarovsky

European Data Protection Law Review, Volume 4 (2018), Issue 4, Page 447 - 458

In this article, I argue that due to numerous shortcomings, current online consent mechanisms do not allow data subjects to think, decide and choose according to their internal beliefs, therefore impairing essential individual freedoms – or capabilities, following Martha Nussbaum’s Capabilities Approach. I identify the main shortcomings of consent in privacy as issues of cognitive limitations, information overload, information insufficiency, lack of intervenability and lack of free choice, describing the type of imbalance present in each category. Then, based on current privacy theories and focusing on the concepts of autonomy and protection – and how they can be combined and manifested in policymaking - I propose the Methodology for Autonomy-Preserving Protection (MAPP), a methodology to evaluate (old) or design (new) measures to improve consent and reinstall the freedoms of thought, decision and choice in this context. According to the MAPP, if an entity A wants to generate positive welfare to an individual B, then: 1) the intentions or goals of A must be transparent, known to B and open to legal questioning and criticism; 2) the actions of A must be transparent, non-manipulative, known to B and open to legal questioning and criticism; and 3) the actions of A must not interfere in the decision-making capacities of B, preserving her autonomy. Lastly, applying the methodology, I present a non-exhaustive list of Autonomy-Preserving Protective Measures (APPMs), showing how they can enable the three freedoms highlighted in the present work and support more effective consent mechanisms. Keywords: Information Privacy, Consent, Data Protection, Autonomy, Paternalism

Genetic Information and Communities: journal article

A Triumph of Communitarianism over the Right to Data Protection under the GDPR?

Adam Panagiotopoulos

European Data Protection Law Review, Volume 4 (2018), Issue 4, Page 459 - 469

This article addresses the question of whether and under which conditions a communitarian approach could be embedded in the data protection regime, focusing on the concept and regulation of genetic data under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Reflecting on the collective and relational dimension of genetic data, this article challenges the communitarian doctrine, which underlies the relevant GDPR provisions, and suggests that the common good should not have ipso facto primacy over individual rights. The rights to data protection and privacy should be considered as individual rights, duties and shared ends. Keywords: Communitarianism, Genetic Data, Data Protection, Privacy, Public Interest