C-293/12 And C-594/12 Digital Rights Ireland Et Al - Case Summary
Skip to content
First-class Oxford EU law notes
Go to shopPremiumNotes
PQGuide
ModelAnswers
Facts
- The Data Retention Directive required telecommunications companies to retain data of customers for the purpose of crime prevention and investigation and national security
- The applicant challenged the validity of the directive against the Article 7 (right to privacy) and Article 8 (right to protection of personal data) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights
Ruling (Court of Justice)
- The directive was invalid
Judgment
- By adopting Directive 2006/24, the EU legislature has exceeded the limits imposed by compliance with the principle of proportionality in the light of Articles 7, 8 and 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights
- The directive does not lay down clear and precise rules governing the extent of interference with Articles 7 and 8 Charter
- It also does not provide sufficient safeguards to protect the data retained against the risk of abuse and against unlawful access of the data
Get tutored by our team of lawprofs who graduated top of their class at Oxbridge 🥇
Từ khóa » C-293/12
-
Cases C‑293/12 - CURIA - List Of Results
-
Digital Rights Ireland - CURIA - List Of Results
-
Joined Cases C-293/12 And 594/12 Digital Rights Ireland And ...
-
Digital Rights Ireland Ltd V. Minister For Communications, Marine ...
-
Digital Rights Ireland Ltd V Minister For Communications, Marine And ...
-
[PDF] Joined Cases C-293/12 And C‐ 594/12 Digital Rights Ireland Ltd V ...
-
[PDF] Judgment In Joined Cases C-293/12 And C-594/12 Digital ...
-
[PDF] The Court Of Justice And The Data Retention Directive In Digital ...
-
Digital Rights Ireland And Communications Surveillance In The EU
-
Digital Rights Ireland And Seitlinger And Others (joined Cases)
-
''Data Retention In The Aftermath Of Digital Rights Ireland And Seitlinger''
-
The Awakening Of EU Data Retention Rules - Eucrim
-
Digital Rights Ireland And Seitlinger And Others V Minister For ...
-
CJEU - Joined Cases C 203/15 And C 698/15 - Tele2/Watson