The decision means the CJEU will need to clarify the framework for GDPR damages claims.

By Tim Wybitul, Dr. Christoph Baus, and Dr. Isabelle Brams

The German Federal Constitutional Court has ruled that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) needs to clarify if the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) provides for a materiality threshold for GDPR damage claims. The decision overturns a judgment of the Goslar Local Court of 27 September 2019 regarding the unlawful sending of an advertising email.

Recent action by the Hamburg authority may present implications for companies regulated by a lead data protection supervisory authority in Europe.

By Fiona Maclean, Tim Wybitul, Joachim Grittmann, Wolf Böhm, Isabelle Brams, and Amy Smyth

A German supervisory authority has initiated an investigation into Google’s speech recognition practices and language assistant technologies, which are integrated into its Google Assistant product. More specifically, the Hamburg supervisory authority opened proceedings with the intention to “prohibit Google from carrying out corresponding evaluations by employees or third parties for a period of three months. This is intended to protect the personal rights of those concerned for the time being.

This blog post analyzes the procedure against Google in Germany, in the context of recent trends elsewhere in Europe to transfer cases to lead authorities, and the impact for other companies regulated by a lead supervisory authority. The proceedings against Google might be resolved amicably, but still raise substantial questions over the powers of supervisory authorities under the cooperation and consistency mechanism of the GDPR.

EU data protection authorities are imposing increased penalties under the GDPR, with more proceedings forecast for 2019.

By Tim Wybitul, Prof. Dr. Thomas Grützner, Dr. Wolf-Tassilo Böhm, and Dr. Isabelle Brams

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) has been in effect since May 2018. Although the French data protection authority (CNIL) has imposed the highest fine to date — €50 million on 21 January 2019 — German federal data protection authorities have already imposed fines for GDPR infringements in 41 cases nationwide and say that they have “very many” additional fine proceedings in progress. This first wave of fines has come from five German authorities, with 11 authorities having not yet imposed any fines under the GDPR.

Under the former German data protection law, companies faced a maximum penalty of €300,000 for violations. However, the GDPR provides authorities with different disciplinary options and they can now impose fines of up to €20 million or more. The maximum fine may amount to up to 4% of the worldwide annual turnover. Hence, corporates with an annual revenue of more than €500 million may face fines exceeding the €20 million threshold.

Germany’s first GDPR fine offers lesson for companies planning a data breach policy.

By Tim Wybitul, Wolf-Tassilo Böhm, and Isabelle Brams

In November 2018, Germany’s first fine under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was imposed — and it was much lower than many expected. The favourable outcome of the proceedings for the defending company demonstrates that, with a proper defence strategy, GDPR infringements may not necessarily end in a worst-case scenario for companies.

In July 2018, Knuddels GmbH & Co. KG (Knuddels), operator of the chat community Knuddels.de, noted the loss of 1.8 million user data records (including a file with unencrypted user passwords) as the result of a cyberattack. After reporting this incident to the appropriate supervisory authority, Knuddels was investigated for infringement of the GDPR. Because the authority deemed that the company’s IT security was not state-of-the-art, there was a high risk that the supervisory authority would impose a large fine on Knuddels.

On 5 November 2010, the German Second Chamber (Bundesrat) commented on the Government’s draft for the new HR Privacy Bill. The Government introduced the bill in August in order to create specific rules for the collection and processing of HR data before, during and after an employment relationship. The Bill includes prohibits the use of social networks for research on candidates and sets out specific rules for different types of employee monitoring. The Bundesrat demands from the

Federal and State Privacy Commissioners in Germany demand that the introduction of smart meteriniStock_globe.jpgg systems shall be accompanied with adequate provisions for the protection of personal data. The introduction of smart metering systems controlling energy consumption is being pursued vigorously both at a European and a German level with the goal to improve energy efficiency. The Privacy Commissioners say that data privacy should be taken into account properly already during the research and development processes for the new technology.

iStock_Lock.jpgThe German Government does not see any need for them to take action with regard to the US-American “Safe Harbor” framework which has become subject to growing criticism. In a response to a query made by the SPD parliamentary group dated 25 October 2010 the Government refers the issue to the European Commission and the supervisory authorities of the German States. Following a study (“The US Safe Harbor – Fact or Fiction?”) by Chris Connolly (data privacy and