Asia Pacific news

This column provides a country-by-country analysis of the latest legal developments, cases and issues relevant to the IT, media and telecommunications' industries in key jurisdictions across the Asia Pacific region. The articles appearing in this column are intended to serve as ‘alerts’ and are not submitted as detailed analyses of cases or legal developments.     

Law enforcement access to personal data originally collected by private parties: Missing data subjects' safeguards in directive 2016/680?

Access by law enforcement authorities to personal data initially collected by private parties for commercial or operational purposes is very common, as shown by the transparency reports of new technology companies on law enforcement requests. From a data protection perspective, the scenario of law enforcement access is not necessarily well taken into account. The adoption of the new data protection framework offers the opportunity to assess whether the new ‘police’ Directive, which regulates the processing of personal data for law enforcement purposes, offers sufficient safeguards to individuals. To make this assessment, provisions contained in Directive 2016/680 are tested against the standards established by the ECJ in Digital Rights Ireland and Tele2 Sverige on the retention of data and their further access and use by police authorities. The analysis reveals that Directive 2016/680 does not contain the safeguards identified in the case law. The paper further assesses the role and efficiency of the principle of purpose limitation as a safeguard against repurposing in a law enforcement context. Last, solutions to overcome the shortcomings of Directive 2016/680 are examined in conclusion.     

Asia Pacific news

This column provides a country-by-country analysis of the latest legal developments, cases and issues relevant to the IT, media and telecommunications’ industries in key jurisdictions across the Asia Pacific region. The articles appearing in this column are intended to serve as ‘alerts’ and are not submitted as detailed analyses of cases or legal developments.     

Opinion 1/15 of the Grand Chamber dated 26 July 2017 about the agreement on Passenger Name Record data between the EU and Canada

On 26 July 2017, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Justice rendered its seminal Opinion 1/15 about the agreement on Passenger Name Record data between the EU and Canada. The Grand Chamber considered that the decision of the Council about the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the agreement between the EU and Canada about the transfer and processing of PNR data must be based jointly on Article 16(2) about the protection of personal data and Article 87(2)(a) about police co-operation among member states in criminal matters, but not on Article 82(1)(d) about judicial co-operation in criminal matters in the EU of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. The Grand Chamber also considered that the agreement is incompatible with Article 7 on the right to respect for private life, Article 8 on the right to the protection of personal data, Article 21 on non-discrimination and Article 52(1) on the principle of proportionality of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU since it does not preclude the transfer, use and retention of sensitive data. In addition to the requirement to exclude such data, the Grand Chamber listed seven requirements that the agreement must include, specify, limit or guarantee to be compatible with the Charter.The opinion of the Grand Chamber has far-reaching implications for the agreement on PNR data between the EU and Canada. It has also far-reaching implications for international agreements on PNR data between the EU and other third states. Last, it has far-reaching implications for Directive 681 of 27 April 2016 on PNR data.     

The new progress in Chinese Arbitration Law

The Chinese Arbitration Law of 1995, together with the Civil Procedure Law and other sources of arbitration laws, is served as the legal bases for the Chinese arbitration system. Compared with advanced arbitration systems in the world, there still exist some defects of the Chinese Arbitration Law due to its lack of rich legislative experience and the conservative attitude toward arbitration. However, the Judicial Interpretation by the Supreme Court of China in 1995 makes a progress in Chinese Arbitration Law by strengthening the support to arbitration, but not playing the interventionist role of it.     

公司瑕疵设立与公司法人格否认法理

自从公司法人制度建立以来,虚假出资、虚设股东等公司瑕疵设立行为就层出不穷,这些行为严重侵害债权人利益,损害社会信用制度,成为困扰我国公司法人人格制度的一大问题。应当引入公司法人格否认法理来规制公司瑕疵设立行为。     

《塔林手册》对我国网络安全利益的影响

北约发布的《塔林手册》系统回答了国际法对网络战的适用性问题,体现了以美国为代表的西方军事理论界、国际法学界、网络技术专家对网络空间安全冲突的认识和理解。综合该手册为网络行为所界定的95条规则,一方面,对我有积极作用,例如有利于我维护网络主权、驳斥关于网络攻击行为的不实指责等;另一方面,也向我提出了严峻挑战,例如肯定了先发制人实施打击、大规模杀伤性网络攻击的合法性等。研究这部重要文献对我国网络安全利益的影响,对于我维护国家安全,有针对性地加强国际对话,建设中国特色的网络安全理论体系,以及加强国际协作,具有重要意义。     

论斯瓦尔巴群岛的法律地位

斯瓦尔巴群岛又称斯匹次卑尔根群岛,是北极地区的重要岛屿。1920年的《斯匹次卑尔根群岛条约》改变了斯瓦尔巴群岛无主地的法律地位,将该岛主权赋予挪威,在群岛上确立了“主权确定,共同开发”的原则,但挪威对斯瓦尔巴群岛享有的“完全和绝对的”主权是在《斯匹次卑尔根群岛条约》规定限制下的有限主权,与传统国际法意义上主权的概念不尽相同。挪威以这种“有限”主权依据《联合国海洋法公约》规定享有专属经济区和大陆架,必将损害《斯匹次卑尔根群岛条约》设立的公平原则,未来对斯瓦尔巴群岛法律地位的争议还将长期存在。     

专利药品差别定价制理念与适用

《TRIPs协议修正案》的出台有一定的历史背景。它的诞生也会对差别定价制产生显著的进一步影响。该《修正案》的出台促使了全球差别定价制的发展。差别定价制中的发达国家完全补偿类型、发展中国家支付专利使用费补偿类型和最不发达国家零补偿类型也会受到该《修正案》的影响。这些影响的构成有一定的政治、经济和法律原因。