- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Belgium · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- Privacy topics
BV QARIN ROTTERDAM, MOBILITY CENTRAL, VLAAMSE GEMEENTSCHAP – Court Ruling (Belgium, 2021)
Privacy enforcement record
This record is classified outside cookie consent. Subject classification does not confirm an applicable law. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.
The Council of State in Belgium ruled on a challenge to a tender awarded to a US company for cloud services. This matters because it shows that companies must ensure data protection when transferring data outside the EU. The decision clarifies that using encryption can help meet data protection requirements.
What happened
A Dutch company challenged the Flemish Authorities' decision to award a cloud services tender to a US company.
Who was affected
The Dutch company that was not selected for the tender and the residents whose data could be affected.
What the authority found
The Council of State found that the tender process did not violate data protection rules and that encryption could be a valid measure.
Why this matters
This ruling reinforces the importance of data protection in international transfers and suggests that companies can use encryption to enhance security.
View original scraped data
Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.
Source checks
Linked-source text retrieved.
Automated check recorded — 18 March 2026.
Processing notes: articles corrected, authority corrected.
Retrieved text may be a secondary summary or an announcement. These automated statuses do not establish that the original decision was read or that the record received an independent legal review. How we check sources
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
Cite as: Cookie Fines. BV QARIN ROTTERDAM, MOBILITY CENTRAL, VLAAMSE GEMEENTSCHAP - Belgium (2021). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: