News
The impact of Brexit on EEA-UK data flows
The free movement of personal data within the EEA is a cornerstone of the Single Market – crucial to businesses and consumers operating in the EEA. For users and providers of cloud services within the EEA, it is essential for frictionless data transfers.
However, the UK government has confirmed that it will not be seeking membership of the Single Market as part of its Brexit negotiation strategy. In this article we examine comments in the UK government's white paper on principles underpinning its Brexit negotiation strategy and from the UK Minister of State for Digital and Culture, which shed some initial light on how the UK government intends to negotiate uninterrupted EEA-UK data flows.
The free movement of personal data within the EEA is a cornerstone of the Single Market – crucial to businesses and consumers operating in the EEA. For users and providers of cloud services within the EEA, it is essential for frictionless data transfers.
However, the UK government has confirmed that it will not be seeking membership of the Single Market as part of its Brexit negotiation strategy – it will be pursuing instead a new strategic partnership with the EU, which, on the face of it, would be incompatible with continued UK membership of the EEA or the EFTA. Comments in the UK government's white paper on principles underpinning its Brexit negotiation strategy and from the UK Minister of State for Digital and Culture shed some initial light on how the UK government intends to negotiate uninterrupted EEA-UK data flows.
The reason why this is a potential issue is because current and future EU data protection laws are, by default, designed to ensure the free movement of personal data between: (a) EU member states; and (b) European Economic Area (EEA) states who are not members of the EU (Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein), but who are bound to comply with certain fundamental EU rules and restrictions in return for being included in the Single Market. Those laws restrict the transfer of personal data to "third countries" outside the EEA without adequate protections in place. On the basis that the UK will be regarded as a "third country" for data protection purposes under any Brexit model in which it falls outside of the EEA, businesses would be restricted from transferring personal data from the EEA to the UK unless: (a) the European Commission has deemed the UK to offer "adequate protection"; (b) a EU-US Privacy Shield style arrangement is agreed between the UK and the European Commission; or (c) the business uses some other form of transfer mechanism in the same way as is currently permitted by the EU Data Protection Directive (e.g. standard contractual clauses or binding corporate rules).
The UK government’s key messages on these issues are as follows:
(a) it would aim to ensure that any new strategic partnership with the EU, including "an ambitious and comprehensive Free Trade Agreement" would "take in elements of current Single Market arrangements in certain areas" (which presumably could include free movement of personal data);
(b) it recognises the importance of the stability of EEA-UK data transfers for many sectors and that maintaining frictionless data flows between the EEA and UK is a core goal for the UK government to pursue in the Brexit negotiation process;
(c) implementing the GDPR fully into UK law so that it is harmonised with the European legislation is a key way that the UK can "maximise the ease" with which it can negotiate uninterrupted and unhindered EEA-UK data flows post-Brexit;
(d) it does not foresee any significant changes being made to UK data protection laws once the UK leaves the EU;
(e) it is aware of the European Commission's ability to recognise data protection standards in third countries as being "essentially equivalent" to those in the EU; and
(f) whilst Brexit negotiations have yet to begin it is unable to give any other details of what other arrangements the UK might put in place to ensure the seamless flow of personal data between the UK and EEA post-Brexit (including whether it will pursue an 'adequacy decision' or adopt another method to ensure the unhindered flow of personal data (presumably some sort of EU-US Privacy Shield style or similar arrangement)).
The success of the UK government's Brexit discussions around data transfers will ultimately hinge on the UK securing a suitable solution to legitimise data transfers from inside the EEA to the UK. The possibilities include: (a) the European Commission deems the UK to offer "adequate protection"; or (b) an EU-US Privacy Shield style arrangement is agreed between the UK and the European Commission.
However, for various reasons the UK government is likely to face a number of political, legal and procedural challenges in securing an adequacy decision or alternative long-term data transfer solution despite the UK's close historical association with strict EU data protection laws, the UK government's intention to implement the GDPR in the UK from 25 May 2018 and the UK data protection regulator's public commitments to taking an active role in ensuring UK adequacy.
Businesses will therefore be closely monitoring upcoming discussions and negotiations in order to ensure appropriate transfer mechanisms are in place once the UK leaves the EU.
Article published by: Emily Jones, Partner at Osborne Clarke LLP
Discover more about the Cloud Privacy Check(CPC) / Data Privacy Compliance(DPC) project
CPC project office: Dr. Tobias Höllwarth, tobias.hoellwarth@eurocloud.at
News Archiv
- Alle zeigen
- November 2024
- Oktober 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- Juli 2024
- Juni 2024
- Mai 2024
- April 2024
- März 2024
- Februar 2024
- Jänner 2024
- Dezember 2023
- November 2023
- Oktober 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- Juli 2023
- Juni 2023
- Mai 2023
- April 2023
- März 2023
- Februar 2023
- Jänner 2023
- Dezember 2022
- November 2022
- Oktober 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- Juli 2022
- Mai 2022
- April 2022
- März 2022
- Februar 2022
- November 2021
- September 2021
- Juli 2021
- Mai 2021
- April 2021
- Dezember 2020
- November 2020
- Oktober 2020
- Juni 2020
- März 2020
- Dezember 2019
- Oktober 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- Juli 2019
- Juni 2019
- Mai 2019
- April 2019
- März 2019
- Februar 2019
- Jänner 2019
- Dezember 2018
- November 2018
- Oktober 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- Juli 2018
- Juni 2018
- Mai 2018
- April 2018
- März 2018
- Februar 2018
- Dezember 2017
- November 2017
- Oktober 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- Juli 2017
- Juni 2017
- Mai 2017
- April 2017
- März 2017
- Februar 2017
- November 2016
- Oktober 2016
- September 2016
- Juli 2016
- Juni 2016
- Mai 2016
- April 2016
- März 2016
- Februar 2016
- Jänner 2016
- Dezember 2015
- November 2015
- Oktober 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- Juli 2015
- Juni 2015
- Mai 2015
- April 2015
- März 2015
- Februar 2015
- Jänner 2015
- Dezember 2014
- November 2014
- Oktober 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- Juli 2014
- Juni 2014
- Mai 2014
- April 2014
- März 2014
- Februar 2014
- Jänner 2014
- Dezember 2013
- November 2013
- Oktober 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- Juli 2013
- Juni 2013
- Mai 2013
- April 2013
- März 2013
- Februar 2013
- Jänner 2013
- Dezember 2012
- November 2012
- Oktober 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- Juli 2012
- Juni 2012
- Mai 2012
- April 2012
- März 2012
- Februar 2012
- Jänner 2012
- Dezember 2011
- November 2011
- Oktober 2011
- September 2011
- Juli 2011
- Juni 2011
- Mai 2011
- April 2011
- März 2011
- Februar 2011
- Jänner 2011
- November 2010
- Oktober 2010
- September 2010
- Juli 2010