Case C-498/16, Schrems – a Facebook consumer or simply in the business of privacy?

This case concerns a person with a Facebook account. He uses it not only to exchange private photographs and chat with about 250 friends but also for publicity purposes. The legal issue is whether this latter activity stops him from qualifying as a ‘consumer’. The definition matters because if he is a consumer, then he and several thousand other Austrians who are aggrieved at Facebook’s use of their personal data will be able to sue in the Austrian courts.

Continue reading

Case C-267/16, Buhagiar – Gibraltar, guns and the constitutional order

The Supreme Court of Gibraltar has made its first preliminary reference to the CJEU, and the burning issue is the free movement of hunters’ firearms.

Continue reading

Case C-169/15, Montis Design – EU copyright and Benelux design formalities, a game of musical chairs?

When a company owns the Benelux rights in the design of a chair but then it fails to maintain the registration of its Benelux rights under Benelux law, can a rival company still be stopped from making similar chairs because of the links between the old Benelux law and current EU law? More specifically, what is the relationship between Benelux rights and the EU’s ‘term of protection’ Directive 93/98/EEC?

Continue reading

Case C-698/15, Davis – did the CJEU in Digital Rights Ireland intend to lay down mandatory requirements of EU law?

In 2006, the EU’s ‘data retention’ Directive 2006/24/EC required telecoms companies to store data traffic. In its Digital Rights Ireland judgment of 2014, the CJEU annulled the Directive because the Directive was incompatible with the EU Charter. Six national courts have subsequently declared their national data retention laws to be invalid. However, in other Member States legal uncertainty surrounds what the CJEU actually decided and the legal effects that flow from it. In that context, a Swedish court has already made a preliminary reference to the CJEU. Now, the Court of Appeal of England and Wales has decided to make its own preliminary reference.

Continue reading

Case C-526/15, Uber Belgium – facilitating a mobility service not a taxi service

Do occasional private car drivers who use Uber’s software and get paid to take people on journeys but who do not receive remuneration or a wage, provide a taxi service requiring a license?

Continue reading

Case A-2/15, The EU-Singapore Free Trade Agreement – a mixed agreement?

In October 2014, the EU and Singapore concluded a free trade agreement. However, there is uncertainty surrounding how to classify the legal agreement. That is to say, is it an agreement which the EU has exclusive competence to sign and ratify? Or is it a ‘mixed agreement’ which would mean that the approval of every single parliament in every single Member State is also required before the agreement can be ratified?

Continue reading

Case C-398/15, Manni – data in public registers should be subject to the Google right to be forgotten

Details about Mr Manni were incorporated in a public register. Data in the register was subsequently processed and used for other purposes by a commercial company. The question in this case is whether Mr Manni can require the administrators of the register to respect his right to privacy in accordance with the CJEU’s ‘right to be forgotten’ Google judgment.

Continue reading

Case C-203/15, Tele2 Sverige – Swedish data retention despite Digital Rights Ireland

Telecoms companies were legally required to store data traffic until the CJEU’s judgment in Digital Rights Ireland. The CJEU annulled the EU’s Data Retention Directive for being incompatible with the EU Charter. Nevertheless, Swedish telecoms companies are still being required to store data. The legal basis for this is an earlier EU Directive, which had been amended by the Data Retention Directive. Is this regulatory approach compatible with the EU Charter?

Continue reading