ExamGecko
Question list
Search
Search

List of questions

Search

Related questions


SCENARIO Please use the following to answer the next question: ProStorage is a multinational cloud storage provider headquartered in the Netherlands. Its CEO. Ruth Brown, has developed a two-pronged strategy for growth: 1) expand ProStorage s global customer base and 2) increase ProStorage's sales force by efficiently onboarding effective teams. Enacting this strategy has recently been complicated by Ruth's health condition, which has limited her working hours, as well as her ability to travel to meet potential customers. ProStorage's Human Resources department and Ruth's Chief of Staff now work together to manage her schedule and ensure that she is able to make all her medical appointments The latter has become especially crucial after Ruth's last trip to India, where she suffered a medical emergency and was hospitalized m New Delhi Unable to reach Ruths family, the hospital reached out to ProStorage and was able to connect with her Chief of Staff, who in coordination with Mary, the head of HR. provided information to the doctors based on accommodate on requests Ruth made when she started a: ProStorage In support of Ruth's strategic goals of hiring more sales representatives, the Human Resources team is focused on improving its processes to ensure that new employees are sourced, interviewed, hired, and onboarded efficiently. To help with this, Mary identified two vendors, HRYourWay, a German based company, and InstaHR, an Australian based company. She decided to have both vendors go through ProStorage's vendor risk review process so she can work with Ruth to make the final decision. As part of the review process, Jackie, who is responsible for maintaining ProStorage's privacy program (including maintaining controller BCRs and conducting vendor risk assessments), reviewed both vendors but completed a transfer impact assessment only for InstaHR. After her review of both boasted a more established privacy program and provided third-party attestations, whereas HRYourWay was a small vendor with minimal data protection operations. Thus, she recommended InstaHR. ProStorage's marketing team also worked to meet the strategic goals of the company by focusing on industries where it needed to grow its market share. To help with this, the team selected as a partner UpFinance, a US based company with deep connections to financial industry customers. During ProStorage's diligence process, Jackie from the privacy team noted in the transfer impact assessment that UpFinance implements several data protection measures including end-to-end encryption, with encryption keys held by the customer. Notably, UpFinance has not received any government requests in its 7 years of business. Still, Jackie recommended that the contract require UpFinance to notify ProStorage if it receives a government request for personal data UpFinance processes on its behalf prior to disclosing such data. What transfer mechanism did ProStorage most likely rely on to transfer Ruth's medical information to the hospital?








SCENARIO Please use the following to answer the next question: Brady is a computer programmer based in New Zealand who has been running his own business for two years. Brady's business provides a low-cost suite of services to customers throughout the European Economic Area (EEA). The services are targeted towards new and aspiring small business owners. Brady's company, called Brady Box, provides web page design services, a Social Networking Service (SNS) and consulting services that help people manage their own online stores. Unfortunately, Brady has been receiving some complaints. A customer named Anna recently uploaded her plans for a new product onto Brady Box's chat area, which is open to public viewing. Although she realized her mistake two weeks later and removed the document, Anna is holding Brady Box responsible for not noticing the error through regular monitoring of the website. Brady believes he should not be held liable. Another customer, Felipe, was alarmed to discover that his personal information was transferred to a third- party contractor called Hermes Designs and worries that sensitive information regarding his business plans may be misused. Brady does not believe he violated European privacy rules. He provides a privacy notice to all of his customers explicitly stating that personal data may be transferred to specific third parties in fulfillment of a requested service. Felipe says he read the privacy notice but that it was long and complicated Brady continues to insist that Felipe has no need to be concerned, as he can personally vouch for the integrity of Hermes Designs. In fact, Hermes Designs has taken the initiative to create sample customized banner advertisements for customers like Felipe. Brady is happy to provide a link to the example banner ads, now posted on the Hermes Designs webpage. Hermes Designs plans on following up with direct marketing to these customers. Brady was surprised when another customer, Serge, expressed his dismay that a quotation by him is being used within a graphic collage on Brady Box's home webpage. The quotation is attributed to Serge by first and last name. Brady, however, was not worried about any sort of litigation. He wrote back to Serge to let him know that he found the quotation within Brady Box's Social Networking Service (SNS), as Serge himself had posted the quotation. In his response, Brady did offer to remove the quotation as a courtesy. Despite some customer complaints, Brady's business is flourishing. He even supplements his income through online behavioral advertising (OBA) via a third-party ad network with whom he has set clearly defined roles. Brady is pleased that, although some customers are not explicitly aware of the OBA, the advertisements contain useful products and services. Under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), what is the most likely reason Serge may have grounds to object to the use of his quotation?

Question 175 - CIPP-E discussion

Report
Export

To receive a preliminary interpretation on provisions of the GDPR, a national court will refer its case to which of the following?

A.

The Court of Justice of the European Union.

Answers
A.

The Court of Justice of the European Union.

B.

The European Data Protection Supervisor.

Answers
B.

The European Data Protection Supervisor.

C.

The European Court of Human Rights.

Answers
C.

The European Court of Human Rights.

D.

The European Data Protection Board.

Answers
D.

The European Data Protection Board.

Suggested answer: A

Explanation:

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is the judicial body of the EU that makes decisions on issues of EU law and enforces European decisions either in respect to actions taken by the European Commission against a member state or actions taken by individuals to enforce their rights under EU law. The CJEU consists of two courts: the Court of Justice and the General Court. The CJEU ensures the uniform interpretation and application of EU law across the EU and settles disputes between EU institutions, member states, and individuals.

According to the EU Treaties, EU Member-States' courts may -- or, in case no appeal from their decisions is possible, must -- ask the CJEU to rule on the interpretation and validity of disputed provisions of EU law. Such decisions are known as preliminary rulings, by which the CJEU expresses its ultimate authority to interpret EU law and which are binding for all national courts in the EU when they apply those specific provisions in individual cases. Since May 2018 -- when the GDPR became applicable across the EU -, the CJEU has played an important role in clarifying the meaning and scope of some of its key concepts. For instance, the Court notably ruled that two parties as different as a website owner that has embedded a Facebook plugin and Facebook may be qualified as joint controllers by taking converging decisions ( Fashion ID case ), that consent for online data processing is not validly expressed through pre-ticked boxes ( Planet49 case) and that the European Commission Decision to grant adequacy to the EU-US Privacy Shield framework is invalid as a mechanism for international data transfers, and supplemental measures may be necessary to lawfully transfer data outside of the EU on the basis of Commission-vetted model clauses (in the Schrems II case ).

Therefore, to receive a preliminary interpretation on provisions of the GDPR, a national court will refer its case to the Court of Justice of the European Union, which is the ultimate authority on EU law and the GDPR.

GDPR

Court of Justice of the European Union

Court of Justice of the European Union - International Association of Privacy Professionals

Judicial enforcement of EU law | European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions

[Competences of the Court of Justice of the European Union]

asked 22/11/2024
Isaac Olanrewaju
36 questions
User
Your answer:
0 comments
Sorted by

Leave a comment first