On July 15, 2021, the European Data Protection Baord (EDPB) adopted its first urgent binding decision in application of Art. 66(2) GDPR following a request from the Hamburg supervisory authority.
However, under article 66 GDPR, as the Irish supervisory authority is the the lead supervisory authority in this matter, the Hamburg Authority needed the validation of the EDPB for these provisional measures to become final.
The EDPB rejected the Hamburg Auhtority’s request but requires further investigations to be carried out on Facebook and Whatsapp Ireland.
In its recent decision of June 15, 2021, involving Facebook and the Belgium Data Protection Authority (“DPA”), the European Court of Justice (the “ECJ” or the “Court”) clarified the conditions under which the non-lead supervisory authorities may exercise their powers
By a decision of 23 June 2020, the German Federal Supreme Court provisionally confirms the allegation of abuse of a dominant position by Facebook because its users were not given the choice over the level of personalisation of their Facebook experience, which entails the collection of data from sources outside the Facebook network (e.g. Instragram, internet browsing etc.).
The Court considered that Facebook practice may hinder the competition in the social network and online advertising market due to its dominant position and provisionally upheld the decision of the German Federal Cartel Office (“Bundeskartellamt”) prohibiting Facebook from processing personal data collected outside the Facebook environment without the users’ additional consent.
This decision is interesting as it shows that in certain cases a breach of GDPR provisions may also have consequences on competition law matters.
By decision C‑40/17 of July 29, 2019, Fashion ID vs. German Supervisory Authority, the European Court of Justice ruled that: – The operator of a website, such as Fashion ID, that embeds on its website a social plugin (i.e. Facebook