Facebook fails to prevent case over data transfers going immedialtely to European court

A High Court judge has refused Facebook a stay on her referral to the Court of Justice of the EU of key issues concerning the validity or otherwise of European Commission decisions approving EU-US data transfer channels.

Facebook fails to prevent case over data transfers going immedialtely to European court

By Ann O'Loughlin

A High Court judge has refused Facebook a stay on her referral to the Court of Justice of the EU of key issues concerning the validity or otherwise of European Commission decisions approving EU-US data transfer channels.

Ms Justice Caroline Costello said the referral of the 11 questions to the CJEU must now proceed “immediately”.

Facebook indicated after today's ruling it intends to proceed with its request to the Supreme Court to hear an appeal.

Facebook sought the stay pending the outcome of its request to the Supreme Court to hear an appeal against Ms Justice Caroline Costello’s decision, delivered last October, to make the referral in the first place.

In her ruling today, the judge said the issue was whether it is possible to appeal a referral decision.

Based on existing jurisprudence, which the judge said was binding on her, she held an appellant court cannot set aside or interfere with an order to make a reference.

She rejected Facebook’s submissions there was such a jurisdiction as “without merit” and “misplaced”.

She must hold Facebook has not established it has an arguable case to bring an appeal to either the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court, the judge said.

She rejected arguments Facebook’s rights would be prejudiced if a stay was not granted.

Rather, there would be “very real prejudice” to the rights of millions of data users if the referral was further delayed, she said.

The court would "cause the least injustice" if it refused any stay and made an immediate referral, she ruled.

Last month, Ms Justice Costello set out 11 questions for determination by the CJEU concerning whether European Commission decisions approving EU-US data transfer channels are valid.

The questions raise significant issues of EU law with huge implications, including whether the High Court was correct in finding there is "mass indiscriminate processing" of data by US government agencies under the PRISM and Upstream programmes authorised there.

The questions also ask whether EU law applies to the processing of personal data for national security purposes regardless of whether that data processing takes place in the EU or US or other third country.

Other questions concern whether the Privacy Shield Decision and other measures in the US afford adequate protection for EU citizens whose data is transferred there.

The CJEU is also asked to decide the extent of a data protection authority's (DAA) power to suspend data flows if it considers a third country is subject to surveillance laws which conflict with EU law.

After Ms Justice Caroline Costello set out the questions on April 12, Facebook asked for time to consider that in the context of possibly seeking an appeal against the judge's decision last October to make a reference to the CJEU in the first place.

Lawyers for the Data Protection Commissioner (DPC), queried whether there was any entitlement to appeal a High Court decision to direct a reference but did not object to Facebook being given a short time to consider its approach.

The judge allowed Facebook time to April 30 when its lawyers indicated it was seeking a “leapfrog” appeal to the Supreme Court. A leapfrog appeal is one that bypasses the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court only agrees to hear appeals that it considers raise issues of general public importance or in the interests of justice.

The reference was made in proceedings by the DPC concerning a complaint by Austrian lawyer Max Schrems that transfer of his personal Facebook data by Facebook Ireland to the US breached his data privacy rights as an EU citizen.

The Commissioner brought the proceedings against Facebook Ireland, because its European headquarters are here, and Mr Schrems, who both opposed a reference for different reasons.

The US government, Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Centre, Business Software Alliance and Digital Europe were involved as assistants to the court on legal issues.

Ms Justice Costello agreed to refer after concurring with the Commissioner there are “well founded" grounds for believing the EC decisions approving data transfer channels, known as Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs), are invalid.

Her judgment was primarily concerned with the Data Protection Directive and its focus on whether third country protections for EU citizens data privacy rights are "adequate".

more courts articles

Man (25) in court charged with murdering his father and attempted murder of mother Man (25) in court charged with murdering his father and attempted murder of mother
Man appears in court charged with false imprisonment of woman in van Man appears in court charged with false imprisonment of woman in van
Man in court over alleged false imprisonment of woman Man in court over alleged false imprisonment of woman

More in this section

DUP Hold Crunch Meeting To Decide On Return To Stormont DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson resigns amid historical allegations
Berlin UKB Hospital Is Among Germany's Most Modern Nearly 10,000 people left waiting on trolleys across country in March
Spring weather Mar 28th 2024 Here's what to expect from weather and travel this Easter weekend
War_map
Cookie Policy Privacy Policy Brand Safety FAQ Help Contact Us Terms and Conditions

© Examiner Echo Group Limited