EU Data Retention Directive Invalidated
Time 2 Minute Read

On April 8, 2014, the European Court of Justice ruled that the EU Data Retention Directive is invalid because it disproportionally interferes with the European citizens’ rights to private life and protection of personal data. The Court’s ruling applies retroactively to the day the Directive entered into force.

The Court criticized that the Directive:

  • applies to all individuals, electronic communications and traffic data without differentiation, limitation or exception;
  • does not contain objective criteria for when data access by national authorities is justified;
  • does not contain objective criteria to determine how long data should be retained – the general minimum and maximum retention periods set out in the Directive do not distinguish between categories of data, persons concerned or the data’s usefulness;
  • does not contain sufficient safeguards against potential abuse and does not ensure irreversible destruction of the data upon expiry of the retention period; and
  • does not explicitly require that the data be retained within the EU, therefore violating the requirement in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights that compliance control be exercised by independent authorities.

The case was referred to the European Court of Justice by senior Austrian and Irish courts for a preliminary ruling. On December 12, 2013, the Court’s Advocate General delivered his opinion that the Directive is incompatible with the European Charter of Fundamental Rights.

View the full text of the judgment.

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 2 Minute Read

On April 1, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that the 2024 amendment to Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act, limiting damages, applies retroactively to pending cases.

Time 1 Minute Read

As reported on the Hunton Employment & Labor Perspectives blog, SB 574 is a California bill that would set specific duties for attorneys who use generative artificial intelligence and would restrict how arbitrators may use such tools in decision-making.

Time 3 Minute Read

SB 574 is a California bill that would set specific duties for attorneys who use generative artificial intelligence and would restrict how arbitrators may use such tools in decision-making. It would amend provisions in the Business and Professions Code and the Code of Civil Procedure to address confidentiality, accuracy, bias, and citation verification for attorneys, and to prohibit delegation of arbitral decision-making to AI while adding disclosure and responsibility requirements for arbitrators.

Time 3 Minute Read

On Feb. 23, 2026, New York Governor Kathy Hochul announced that the New York Department of Financial Services (“NYDFS”) had published proposed rules implementing the state’s Buy Now, Pay Later (“BNPL”) law.  The proposal would establish the nation’s first comprehensive regulatory framework for the rapidly growing pay-over-time consumer market niche. 

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Archives

Jump to Page