Information blackout at the Council of Europe? – David Erdos

6 02 2018

Especially in Britain given our intended imminent departure from the EU, it is clear that the Council of Europe has crucial significance to our continent and indeed the world.  Founded as far back as 1949 and with 47 Member States with over 800 million people, it focuses on some of the most difficult and controversial issues concerning human rights, democracy and the rule of law.  Read the rest of this entry »





Leveson, the Data Protection Bill and the ICO’s procedural powers in relation to Journalism – David Erdos

18 01 2018

One of the main findings of Lord Justice Leveson’s Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press was that that the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) did not have sufficient procedural powers to ensure that journalists did not seriously abuse personal data. Read the rest of this entry »





Communicating Responsibilities: The Spanish DPA targets Google’s Notification Practices when Delisting Personal Information – David Erdos

21 03 2017

The Court of Justice’s seminal decision in Google Spain (2014) represented more the beginning rather than the endpoint of specifying the European data protection obligations of search engines when indexing material from the web and, as importantly, ensuring adherence to this.  Read the rest of this entry »





Mind the gap: is data protection catching up with Google Search? – David Erdos

23 05 2014

data-protectionThe European Union Data Protection Directive of 1995 has always had lofty, and in many ways implausible, ambitions. As regards the private sector, it seeks to outlaw the input, storage or other processing on computer of any information relating to a living individual “data subject” (irrespective of whether the information is innocuous and/or widely available in the public domain) unless in each and every case that processing complies with a set of provisions put in place to ensure the protection of “the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons, and in particular their right to privacy” (Art. 1 (1)). Read the rest of this entry »