Sign in Subscribe

Caselaw

Caselaw is a category used by The De La Torre Review specifically for practical examinations of significant court decisions involving privacy, data protection, cybersecurity, consumer protection, and AI in the U.S. and EU. Articles analyze the facts, legal issues, reasoning, holdings, and practical implications of judicial decisions. Regulatory Enforcement, a separate tag, covers agency enforcement actions, investigations, consent orders, and regulatory settlements.

Google Spain: The “Right to Be Forgotten”—While the Past Remains Online

Google Spain: The “Right to Be Forgotten”—While the Past Remains Online

Google Spain established the “right to be forgotten”—but not a right to erase history. The CJEU held that search engines process personal data and may have to delist lawful, accurate information from name-based searches when it is no longer relevant or is excessive.

Commission v Austria Why Formal Independence Is Not Enough

Commission v Austria Why Formal Independence Is Not Enough

The CJEU held that freedom from instructions did not make Austria’s data protection authority completely independent. Its personnel, staffing structure, and the Chancellor’s access to information still created unacceptable risks of indirect influence.

Scarlet: Why Copyright Enforcement Cannot Require General Internet Surveillance

Scarlet: Why Copyright Enforcement Cannot Require General Internet Surveillance

Can copyright protection justify monitoring everyone’s internet traffic? In Scarlet, the CJEU drew the line at indiscriminate filtering, protecting privacy and the freedom to share lawful information.

ASNEF: When Member States Cannot Rewrite the Lawful Bases for Processing

ASNEF: When Member States Cannot Rewrite the Lawful Bases for Processing

ASNEF established that Member States cannot rewrite EU lawful bases for processing or predetermine the legitimate-interest balance. The CJEU held that legitimate interests require a case-specific assessment of necessity and the individual’s competing rights and freedoms.

Dennekamp I: Why Transparency Requests Must Explain the Need for Personal Data

Dennekamp I: Why Transparency Requests Must Explain the Need for Personal Data

Who benefits from Parliament’s pension scheme? In Dennekamp I, the General Court held that public interest alone does not unlock personal data. Requesters must explain exactly why they need the names.