BV QARIN ROTTERDAM, MOBILITY CENTRAL, VLAAMSE GEMEENTSCHAP – Court Ruling (Belgium, 2021)

Court Ruling
DPA CouncilofState19 August 2021Belgium
final
Court Ruling

General GDPR enforcement action

This case relates to broader data protection obligations, not specifically to cookie or consent banner compliance. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.

Belgium's Council of State ruled that using AWS cloud services for a government tender did not violate GDPR. The decision clarifies that encryption can be a valid measure to protect data when using cloud services. This case is significant for companies considering cloud providers, as it shows the importance of implementing strong data protection measures.

What happened

The Council of State upheld the use of AWS cloud services in a government tender, finding no GDPR violations.

Who was affected

The Dutch company that challenged the tender decision, arguing inadequate data protection with AWS cloud services.

What the authority found

The court found that the use of encryption with AWS cloud services could adequately protect data, aligning with GDPR requirements.

Why this matters

This ruling supports the use of encryption as a supplementary measure for data protection in cloud services. Companies should ensure robust security measures when using cloud providers to comply with GDPR.

GDPR Articles Cited

Art. 32 GDPR
Art. 45 GDPR
Art. 46 GDPR
Art. 28(1) GDPR
Art. 28(3) GDPR
Decision AuthorityCouncil of State
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The Flemish Authorities granted a tender to an EU based-entity of a US company using the AWS cloud services. A Dutch company which was not chosen by the Flemish Authorities in the tender process challenged this decision before the Council of State on the basis of the: * violation of the provisions of the GDPR on transfers, since no adequate protection of the data could be afforded in the US. The Dutch company relied in particular on an [https://overheid.vlaanderen.be/sites/default/files/media/VTC/VTC_A_2020_05_advies.pdf opinion] from the Flemish Supervisory Commission ('Vlaamse Toezichtcommissie voor de verwerking van persoonsgegevens) according to which the use of AWS could not be compliant with the Schrems II ruling and the GDPR; * breach of Article 28 GDPR (the choice of a the processor does not provide sufficient guarantees); * breach of Article 32 GDPR (lack of appropriate technical and organisational measures) * lack of motivation of the decision to grant the tender The Council of State held that: * the EDPB and the Flemish Supervisory Commission were not opposed to the use of encryption as such, and such use could be an adequate supplementary measure to the SCCs in some circumstances; * the choice of the processor was not violating Article 28 - the claimant could not demonstrate that the controller and processor did not implement the necessary technical and organisation measures; * the decision was sufficiently motivated.

Outcome

Court Ruling

A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for BV QARIN ROTTERDAM, MOBILITY CENTRAL, VLAAMSE GEMEENTSCHAP in BE

This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.

Details

Ruling Date

19 August 2021

Authority

DPA CouncilofState

About this data

Data: GDPRhub (noyb.eu)
Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
AI-verified and classified

Cite as: Cookie Fines. BV QARIN ROTTERDAM, MOBILITY CENTRAL, VLAAMSE GEMEENTSCHAP - Belgium (2021). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: