Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 5 - Ways to Mitigate Problematic Jurisdictional Overreach

  • Mistale Taylor, Public International Law and Policy Group
  • Book:
    Transatlantic Jurisdictional Conflicts in Data Protection Law
    Published online:
    06 April 2023
    Print publication:
    13 April 2023, pp 95-117

  • Summary

    Simply being applicable could still permit far too much in terms of the extraterritorial reach of the EU’s data protection laws. The law of jurisdiction cannot solve all the present issues. It helps to solve conflicts in terms of sovereignty, but not fundamental rights. As such, this warrants a second-tier, additional set of criteria including degree of connection and interest-balancing as a rule of reason. The degree of connection between a regulated situation and the regulator, and interest-balancing are useful in assessing the legitimacy of the EU’s exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction in the internet age, which throws traditional concepts of territoriality into question. Flowing from this, a rule of reason transpires. A State may legitimately exercise jurisdiction where it has an obligation to do so to protect a fundamental right, based on a permissive principle exercised reasonably, that is, after regulators have balanced different interests to identify the State with the strongest interest in regulating the situation, unless this harms the global interest.