The Protection of Privacy in the Economic Sphere Before the European Court of Justice

Peter Oliver
{"title":"The Protection of Privacy in the Economic Sphere Before the European Court of Justice","authors":"Peter Oliver","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2394179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article focuses on five recent judgments of the ECJ and CFI: ProMusicae, Varec, Pergan, Bavarian Lager and Satamedia. Taking as its starting-point the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on Article 8 ECHR and on Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the author considers how the Community Courts have approached the protection of privacy in the economic sphere (i.e. as regards matters relating to undertakings within the meaning of Arts. 81 and 82 EC and the economic aspects of the lives of natural persons) in the various relevant sectors, especially: data protection, the protection of business and other professional secrets, defamation and inspections (Hoechst and Roquette). Within each of these sectors, particular attention is paid to the specific provisions and case law relating to competition. Inevitably, the inherent tension between the protection of privacy and the principle of transparency repeatedly comes to the fore. Generally speaking, the author welcomes the approach taken by the Community courts, notably their increased emphasis on fundamental rights. However, he claims that, where the case law of the ECtHR is uncertain, this emphasis has at times occurred at the expense of the uniformity of Community law and even of legal certaintly - a development which is of particular concern when the unity of the internal market is at stake. The judgments in ProMusicae and Satamedia are then criticized in this regard.","PeriodicalId":179517,"journal":{"name":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information Privacy Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2394179","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

This article focuses on five recent judgments of the ECJ and CFI: ProMusicae, Varec, Pergan, Bavarian Lager and Satamedia. Taking as its starting-point the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on Article 8 ECHR and on Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the author considers how the Community Courts have approached the protection of privacy in the economic sphere (i.e. as regards matters relating to undertakings within the meaning of Arts. 81 and 82 EC and the economic aspects of the lives of natural persons) in the various relevant sectors, especially: data protection, the protection of business and other professional secrets, defamation and inspections (Hoechst and Roquette). Within each of these sectors, particular attention is paid to the specific provisions and case law relating to competition. Inevitably, the inherent tension between the protection of privacy and the principle of transparency repeatedly comes to the fore. Generally speaking, the author welcomes the approach taken by the Community courts, notably their increased emphasis on fundamental rights. However, he claims that, where the case law of the ECtHR is uncertain, this emphasis has at times occurred at the expense of the uniformity of Community law and even of legal certaintly - a development which is of particular concern when the unity of the internal market is at stake. The judgments in ProMusicae and Satamedia are then criticized in this regard.
欧洲法院对经济领域隐私的保护
本文主要关注欧洲法院和原讼法庭最近的五个判决:ProMusicae, Varec, Pergan, Bavarian Lager和Satamedia。以作为其出发点欧洲人权法院的判例法确立)第八条ECHR和文章7和8的基本权利宪章》,作者认为社区法院如何走近隐私保护在经济领域(例如,至于有关事业在艺术的意义。81年和82年电子商务和经济方面的自然人的生命)在各种相关领域,尤其是:数据保护、商业和其他专业秘密保护、诽谤和检查(Hoechst and Roquette)。在每一个部门内,都特别注意与竞争有关的具体规定和判例法。不可避免地,保护隐私和透明度原则之间的内在紧张关系一再出现。总的来说,发件人欢迎共同体法院所采取的办法,特别是它们更加强调基本权利。然而,他声称,在欧洲人权法院的判例法不确定的情况下,这种强调有时是以牺牲共同体法律的统一性,甚至是法律上的统一性为代价的- -当内部市场的统一性受到威胁时,这种发展是特别令人关切的。ProMusicae和Satamedia的判决在这方面受到了批评。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信