- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
By 
Kyle Brasseur2023-07-07T13:33:00
The European Commission seeks to combat longstanding issues under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) regarding cross-border cases with new proposed rules.
The GDPR Procedural Regulation, announced Tuesday, would not alter the GDPR but serve as a compliment to the landmark data privacy legislation, helping to establish clearer guidelines around the law’s “one-stop shop” mechanism. Under the one-stop shop, cross-border cases against companies are led by the relevant data protection authority (DPA) in the region in which the business is headquartered.
The mechanism has led to criticism and disagreement between EU DPAs, most notably regarding Ireland’s policing of Big Tech giants including Meta, Google, and Twitter.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT. To continue reading, choose one of the options below.
News and analysis for the well-informed compliance or audit exec. Select an option and click continue.
Annual Membership $499 Value offer
Full price one year membership with auto-renewal.
Membership $599
One-year only, no auto-renewal.
Plans to speed up General Data Protection Regulation cases against the likes of Big Tech firms by improving cooperation among the European Union’s data regulators have been largely welcomed by experts.
Adtech firm Criteo was assessed a penalty of €40 million (U.S. $44 million) for multiple alleged violations of the General Data Protection Regulation, including failing to verify it gained consent to process the data of European Union citizens.
The fifth anniversary of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation coming into force has highlighted the many successes of the legislation but also exposed areas where the law is still untested and unclear.
Any product that uses AI needs to be safety assessed for its entire lifespan under new rules that went into effect recently across the EU. Experts warned companies using AI to tailor products could be classed as “manufacturers” and face the same duty of care as developed.
When lawmakers slam the U.K.’s chief financial regulator as “incompetent,” it not only opens the doors for others to pile criticism on it, but it sparks a debate about how the organization can be improved–or removed.
The U.K. Financial Conduct Authority apologized to investors in peer-to-peer investment firm Collateral for not acting swiftly enough to prevent Collateral from defrauding its customers.
