The Victims’ Directive and What Victims Want From Restorative Justice

Following fierce campaigning by victims’ groups, the European Commission has entered into a process of legislative and policy reforms with the aim of repositioning the victim in criminal proceedings. By November 2015, member states will need to have demonstrated that they have modified their domestic laws to give effect to the Directive 2012/29/EU establishing minimum standards on the rights, support, and protection of victims of crime. For the first time, restorative justice is explicitly regulated at EU legal level, as the Directive aims to establish a baseline for its safe implementation across member states. With this EU-wide policy backdrop and using original data, the article posits evidence-based recommendations for the implementation of the Directive. The research was carried out in 2013–14 as part of the “Restorative Justice in Europe” project co-financed by the European Commission. The research took place in the United Kingdom and combined desk research and qualitative research strategies with victims, while it triangulated its findings with follow-up surveys with offenders and professionals.     

西部地区信息资源生产能力制约因素分析

目前,西部地区的信息生产能力明显落后于全国平均水平。其中最为关键的制约因素,或者说对今后西部地区信息资源的生产起主导性作用的因素在于:数据库生产能力和多媒体文献资源的生产能力。     

Compensation for Commercial Agents

This note examines the decision of the House of Lords in Lonsdale (t/a Lonsdale Agencies) v Howard & Hallam Limited ¹ where the House of Lords were asked to rule on the correct method to be applied when calculating the compensation of commercial agents ² under Regulation 17 of The Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993 ³ (the Regulations). This ruling settles this aspect of the law in England and Wales after almost fifteen years of legal and commercial uncertainty on the matter.     

The Cyprus and other EU court rulings on data retention: The Directive as a privacy bomb

This paper discusses the controversy surrounding the Data Retention Directive with an emphasis on the 2011 decision of the Cyprus Supreme Court which has annulled several district court orders that allowed the police access to telecommunications data relating to certain persons relevant to criminal investigations. The annulment has been on the ground that the legal provisions upon which the orders have been issued are unconstitutional. It will suggest that the decision does not entail a direct rejection of the EU Data Retention Directive and that in any event, Cyprus is not a Member State resisting the particular measure. This is because the legal provisions are deemed unconstitutional, though part of the law that has transposed the relevant Directive into national law are provisions that go beyond what the EU legislator intended to regulate through that Directive. Still, the particular Directive sits rather uneasily within the ‘human rights’ regime, in particular the one governing the individual right of privacy.     

Data breach notification law in the EU and Australia – Where to now?

Mandatory data breach notification laws have been a significant legislative reform in response to unauthorized disclosures of personal information by public and private sector organizations. These laws originated in the state-based legislatures of the United States during the last decade and have subsequently garnered worldwide legislative interest. We contend that there are conceptual and practical concerns regarding mandatory data breach notification laws which limit the scope of their applicability, particularly in relation to existing information privacy law regimes. We outline these concerns here, in the light of recent European Union and Australian legal developments in this area.     

Allocating responsibility among controllers,processors, and “everything in between”: the definition of actors and roles in Directive 95/46/EC

In Opinion 1/2010, the Article 29 Data Protection Working Party has provided additional guidance concerning the concepts of ‘controller’ and ‘processor’ contained in Directive 95/46/EC. This guidance aims to assist practitioners in their determination of whether an entity is acting as a controller or as a processor towards a particular data processing operation. Despite the fact that this opinion is informative, the existing framework still appears to leave room for a considerable amount of legal uncertainty. This uncertainty is attributable in part to the nature of the existing concepts, but also (and perhaps to a larger extent) to their apparent misalignment with current processing realities. In this paper, the author seeks to articulate why the existing concepts often remain difficult to apply in practice, in order to enable a constructive reflection on how these issues might be addressed in the future.     

Medical data breaches: Notification delayed is notification denied

The EU and the United States have implemented data breach notification rules that cover the health sectors. Nevertheless, data breach incidents involving medical data continue to rise, especially in the US and the UK. The HITECH Act, Pub. L. 111-5 Title XIII is the first federal health breach notification law in the US to be characterized by less government intrusions, while the revised EU Privacy Directive, 2009/136/EC calls for tougher privacy protection for data held by electronic communication providers. While the EU law sets a global de facto standard, the law remains toothless without strong enforcement mechanisms.     

The EU approach to net neutrality: Network operators and over-the-top players,friends or foes?

This paper will mainly focus on the EU approach to net neutrality, notably the adequacy of existing and future EU rules to tackle the issue and the ongoing policy debate. It will also consider whether the market has effectively worked around the regulatory lacunae by looking into the relationships between the telecoms industry, as a regulated sector, and the over-the-top (OTT) players. In this regard, it will explore to what extent there is a real battle between telcos and OTTs or if both parties are already finding their own ways to overcome their (apparent) disputes.     

欧盟家庭友好政策的性别视角分析——以父母假指令为例

随着一体化从经济领域"外溢"到社会领域,为了实现"社会欧洲"的建设目标,欧盟在重重压力之下构建了家庭友好政策体系.其出发点是提供劳动力保护,帮助父母协调家庭与工作的矛盾.但是由于其潜在目标是促进劳动力市场的公平竞争而非实现性别平等,因此欧盟家庭友好政策仍然存在着种种缺陷.本文以父母假指令为例,从政策文本、实施水平、欧洲法院的判例三方面对欧盟家庭友好政策进行性别视角分析,认为以上三方面存在的不利因素不仅严重制约了父母假指令效力的发挥,而且还对欧洲社会一体化进程造成较大的负面影响.     

iCLIC Data Mining and Data Sharing workshop: The present and future of data mining and data sharing in the EU

Held at Southampton University's Highfield campus and hosted by iCLIC, an interdisciplinary core on Law, the Internet and Culture, the Data Mining and Data Sharing workshop brought together attendees and speakers from industry, government, academia and a range of disciplines alike. The workshop comprised two sessions, each with a keynote and an associated panel. The first session was chaired by Eleonora Rosati and dealt with copyright and database rights, data mining and data sharing. The second session, chaired by Sophie Stalla-Bourdillon, focussed on data protection, data mining and data sharing. The following report covers both sessions, associated panel discussions and the subsequent question and answer sessions.