Yesterday (16 July 2020), the European Court of Justice issued its breaking judgement in the ‘Schrems II’ case. You can read more about the Court’s ruling on our websi
Today, on 16 July 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) handed down its Schrems II judgment invalidating the European Commission’s adequacy decision with respect to the EU-US Privacy Shield Framework, a little less than five years after doing the same with respect to the US Safe Harbour (Privacy Shield’s predecessor)
On 6 July 2020, the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) published a report on the use of data protection impact assessments (DPIAs) within EU institutions.
In the context of the coronavirus pandemic, companies are implementing exceptional measures to protect the health and safety of their employees and clients. As a result of these extraordinary measure
The distancing measures imposed to address the spread of Covid-19 are not only affecting our social relations but are also disrupting the way we are used to doing business. For instance, given that physical meetings can no longer be held to execute transaction documents, electronic signatures are widely being used instead.
In the context of the difficult evolving situation in connection to COVID-19, most companies are currently facing unprecedented legal issues within their organisations. As a result, they have to significantly adapt their way of working to go through this unique time in the best possible and efficient manner
In Luxembourg, the rules on electronic signature and electronic agreements stem from the eIDAS Regulation 910/2014 (the “eIDAS Regulation”), as well as from the civil code and the e-commerce law of 14 August 2000, as amended (1).
In two judgments issued during summer 2019, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) provided guidance regarding the qualification of a service as an “electronic communications service” with the meaning set out under Article 2(c) of Directive 2002/21/EC on electronic communications networks and services (“Framework Directive”). The CJEU indeed held different positions according to the nature of the services provided to end-users.
On 3 October 2019, the CJEU made an important decision in case C-18/18 with respect to the liability of hosting service providers and whether they may be ordered to remove or block access to content that they store. As a reminder, hosting service providers are subject to a specific liability regime regarding the information they transmit or store for their clients, but of course they remain subject to court injunctions.
As regards IT outsourcing of material activities by credit institutions, investment firms and professionals performing lending operations under Circular CSSF 12/552 (as amended) and IT outsourcing by electronic money institutions, payment institutions and professionals of the financial sector ("PFS") other than investment firms, under Circular CSSF 17/656, the CSSF has published on 16 December 2019 a new form for authorisation requests.
