Sep 17, 2023
Joost Case Corner (JCC) is back! As per usual, there’s no way we will cover all of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) goodness in under one hour, so buckle up for an extra-long special episode.
Its a perfect catch up with the lates court action and since its been a while, we can hear our presenters (Milla mainly) trip over some pretty basic EU abbreviations. So all you EU nerds there, prepare to scream really hard to your earphones what TFEU stands for.
We discuss three cases with final judgments already out there: Meta v Bundeskartellamt (C-252/21), Pankki S (C-579/21) and Lietuvos Respublikos (C-162/22).
Under our section on ongoing cases we go through five cases that will likely shake the privacy world once decided: ILVA (C-383/23), Mousse (C-394/23), Österreichische Datenschutzbehörde (C-416/23, which Milla can pronounce perfectly, just wait for it), IAB Europe (C-604/22, sad that Heikki isnt here to rant) EDPS v SRB (C-413/23 P, yes, that annoying pseudonyisation case where normies claim that GDPR doesnt apply). The cases cover definition of personal data, pseudonymization and anonymization, calculation of fines and much more.
We know, you might be a bit lagging behind on the case law, so no worries! This is your cue to press play and dig through the intricacies of data protection case law with Joost, Milla and Pilvi.
Cases covered in the episode:
Cases with final judgments:
Meta v Bundeskartellamt (C-252/21)
Pankki S (C-579/21)
Lietuvos Respublikos (C-162/22)
Österreichische Datenschutzbehörde (C-416/23)
IAB Europe (C-604/22)
EDPS v SRB (C-413/23 P)
Did you enjoy our show? Support us by buying us a coffee here: https://bmc.link/privacypod4u
We would love to get feedback – so please tag us, follow us, DM us, or send us traditional email:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/PodPrivacy, #privacypod