The Microsoft case and a new era in access to extraterritorial evidence

Q. C. Felicity Gerry, Dan Jerker B Svantesson

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterResearchpeer-review

Abstract

A case involving Microsoft that is currently before the US courts has raised important issues between the respective legal regimes in the EU and the US, particularly in relation to the protection of personal data. The case in question has given rise to a degree of legal uncertainty and the outcome could have potentially serious implications for data protection in the EU. By seeking direct access to data held in the EU through the US judicial system, existing legal mechanisms for mutual assistance between jurisdictions may be being effectively bypassed. There are fundamental issues at stake here as regards the protection of personal data that is held within the EU. This is clearly an area where technological advances have taken place in a very rapid fashion. The right to privacy should be afforded maximum protection whilst ensuring that law enforcement agencies have the necessary mechanisms at their disposal to effectively fight serious crime.

I agree with her [the Privacy Commissioner of Canada] that PIPEDA [Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act] gives no indication that Parliament intended to legislate extraterritorially. [...] [However, the] Commissioner does not lose her power to investigate because she can neither subpoena the organization nor enter its premises in Wyoming. ... It would be most regrettable indeed if Parliament gave the Commissioner jurisdiction to investigate foreigners who have Canadian sources of information only if those organizations voluntarily name names. Furthermore, even if an order against a non-resident might be ineffective, the Commissioner could target the Canadian sources of information.

I conclude as a matter of statutory interpretation that the Commissioner had jurisdiction to investigate, and that such an investigation was not contingent upon Parliament having legislated extraterritorially ...
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProof in Modern Litigation
Subtitle of host publicationEvidence Law & Forensic Perspectives
EditorsDavid Caruso, Zhuhao Wang
Place of PublicationAdelaide
PublisherBarr Smith Press
Pages91-102
Number of pages12
ISBN (Print)978-1-925261-48-6
Publication statusPublished - 2017
Event5th International Conference on Evidence Law and Forensic Science (ICELFS 2015) - Adelaide, Australia
Duration: 20 Jul 201523 Jul 2015
Conference number: 5th
http://www.cicjc.com.cn/en/node/3039

Conference

Conference5th International Conference on Evidence Law and Forensic Science (ICELFS 2015)
Abbreviated titleICELFS 2015
CountryAustralia
CityAdelaide
Period20/07/1523/07/15
Internet address

Fingerprint

EU
parliament
jurisdiction
personal data
source of information
evidence
right to privacy
data protection
law enforcement
legal system
privacy
indication
assistance
act
offense
uncertainty
electronics
Canada
organization
interpretation

Cite this

Felicity Gerry, Q. C., & Svantesson, D. J. B. (2017). The Microsoft case and a new era in access to extraterritorial evidence. In D. Caruso, & Z. Wang (Eds.), Proof in Modern Litigation: Evidence Law & Forensic Perspectives (pp. 91-102). Adelaide: Barr Smith Press.
Felicity Gerry, Q. C. ; Svantesson, Dan Jerker B. / The Microsoft case and a new era in access to extraterritorial evidence. Proof in Modern Litigation: Evidence Law & Forensic Perspectives. editor / David Caruso ; Zhuhao Wang. Adelaide : Barr Smith Press, 2017. pp. 91-102
@inbook{d421781a075e41abb89137fee055f504,
title = "The Microsoft case and a new era in access to extraterritorial evidence",
abstract = "A case involving Microsoft that is currently before the US courts has raised important issues between the respective legal regimes in the EU and the US, particularly in relation to the protection of personal data. The case in question has given rise to a degree of legal uncertainty and the outcome could have potentially serious implications for data protection in the EU. By seeking direct access to data held in the EU through the US judicial system, existing legal mechanisms for mutual assistance between jurisdictions may be being effectively bypassed. There are fundamental issues at stake here as regards the protection of personal data that is held within the EU. This is clearly an area where technological advances have taken place in a very rapid fashion. The right to privacy should be afforded maximum protection whilst ensuring that law enforcement agencies have the necessary mechanisms at their disposal to effectively fight serious crime. I agree with her [the Privacy Commissioner of Canada] that PIPEDA [Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act] gives no indication that Parliament intended to legislate extraterritorially. [...] [However, the] Commissioner does not lose her power to investigate because she can neither subpoena the organization nor enter its premises in Wyoming. ... It would be most regrettable indeed if Parliament gave the Commissioner jurisdiction to investigate foreigners who have Canadian sources of information only if those organizations voluntarily name names. Furthermore, even if an order against a non-resident might be ineffective, the Commissioner could target the Canadian sources of information.I conclude as a matter of statutory interpretation that the Commissioner had jurisdiction to investigate, and that such an investigation was not contingent upon Parliament having legislated extraterritorially ...",
author = "{Felicity Gerry}, {Q. C.} and Svantesson, {Dan Jerker B}",
year = "2017",
language = "English",
isbn = "978-1-925261-48-6",
pages = "91--102",
editor = "David Caruso and Zhuhao Wang",
booktitle = "Proof in Modern Litigation",
publisher = "Barr Smith Press",

}

Felicity Gerry, QC & Svantesson, DJB 2017, The Microsoft case and a new era in access to extraterritorial evidence. in D Caruso & Z Wang (eds), Proof in Modern Litigation: Evidence Law & Forensic Perspectives. Barr Smith Press, Adelaide, pp. 91-102, 5th International Conference on Evidence Law and Forensic Science (ICELFS 2015), Adelaide, Australia, 20/07/15.

The Microsoft case and a new era in access to extraterritorial evidence. / Felicity Gerry, Q. C.; Svantesson, Dan Jerker B.

Proof in Modern Litigation: Evidence Law & Forensic Perspectives. ed. / David Caruso; Zhuhao Wang. Adelaide : Barr Smith Press, 2017. p. 91-102.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterResearchpeer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - The Microsoft case and a new era in access to extraterritorial evidence

AU - Felicity Gerry, Q. C.

AU - Svantesson, Dan Jerker B

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - A case involving Microsoft that is currently before the US courts has raised important issues between the respective legal regimes in the EU and the US, particularly in relation to the protection of personal data. The case in question has given rise to a degree of legal uncertainty and the outcome could have potentially serious implications for data protection in the EU. By seeking direct access to data held in the EU through the US judicial system, existing legal mechanisms for mutual assistance between jurisdictions may be being effectively bypassed. There are fundamental issues at stake here as regards the protection of personal data that is held within the EU. This is clearly an area where technological advances have taken place in a very rapid fashion. The right to privacy should be afforded maximum protection whilst ensuring that law enforcement agencies have the necessary mechanisms at their disposal to effectively fight serious crime. I agree with her [the Privacy Commissioner of Canada] that PIPEDA [Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act] gives no indication that Parliament intended to legislate extraterritorially. [...] [However, the] Commissioner does not lose her power to investigate because she can neither subpoena the organization nor enter its premises in Wyoming. ... It would be most regrettable indeed if Parliament gave the Commissioner jurisdiction to investigate foreigners who have Canadian sources of information only if those organizations voluntarily name names. Furthermore, even if an order against a non-resident might be ineffective, the Commissioner could target the Canadian sources of information.I conclude as a matter of statutory interpretation that the Commissioner had jurisdiction to investigate, and that such an investigation was not contingent upon Parliament having legislated extraterritorially ...

AB - A case involving Microsoft that is currently before the US courts has raised important issues between the respective legal regimes in the EU and the US, particularly in relation to the protection of personal data. The case in question has given rise to a degree of legal uncertainty and the outcome could have potentially serious implications for data protection in the EU. By seeking direct access to data held in the EU through the US judicial system, existing legal mechanisms for mutual assistance between jurisdictions may be being effectively bypassed. There are fundamental issues at stake here as regards the protection of personal data that is held within the EU. This is clearly an area where technological advances have taken place in a very rapid fashion. The right to privacy should be afforded maximum protection whilst ensuring that law enforcement agencies have the necessary mechanisms at their disposal to effectively fight serious crime. I agree with her [the Privacy Commissioner of Canada] that PIPEDA [Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act] gives no indication that Parliament intended to legislate extraterritorially. [...] [However, the] Commissioner does not lose her power to investigate because she can neither subpoena the organization nor enter its premises in Wyoming. ... It would be most regrettable indeed if Parliament gave the Commissioner jurisdiction to investigate foreigners who have Canadian sources of information only if those organizations voluntarily name names. Furthermore, even if an order against a non-resident might be ineffective, the Commissioner could target the Canadian sources of information.I conclude as a matter of statutory interpretation that the Commissioner had jurisdiction to investigate, and that such an investigation was not contingent upon Parliament having legislated extraterritorially ...

M3 - Chapter

SN - 978-1-925261-48-6

SP - 91

EP - 102

BT - Proof in Modern Litigation

A2 - Caruso, David

A2 - Wang, Zhuhao

PB - Barr Smith Press

CY - Adelaide

ER -

Felicity Gerry QC, Svantesson DJB. The Microsoft case and a new era in access to extraterritorial evidence. In Caruso D, Wang Z, editors, Proof in Modern Litigation: Evidence Law & Forensic Perspectives. Adelaide: Barr Smith Press. 2017. p. 91-102