Mr. Philippe Latombe, a French member of Parliament, beat privacy activist Max Schrems to the punch! Despite Mr. Schrems’ many statements against the EU-US Data Privacy Framework (DPF), Mr. Latombe was the first to file a request in the EU’s General Court to seek the annulment of the DPF and, separately, an interim measure to suspend the DPF pending the General Court’s decision.

However, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) (the EU’s highest court) rejected Mr. Latombe’s request to suspend the DPF in an interim decision dated October 12, 2023.

The conditions to obtain an interim relief are stringent and are rarely granted. The applicant must demonstrate that the grant of the interim measure (i.e., the suspension of DPF) is (i) prima facie justified in fact and in law; and (ii) urgent, i.e., that it is necessary for the applicant to seek the measure to avoid serious and irreparable damage before the decision on the merits is rendered.

The CJEU’s decision found that Mr. Latombe did not demonstrate the necessary urgency because he could not establish that he would suffer serious harm if the DPF was not suspended. The CJEU found that Mr. Latombe’s arguments were too broad and that he did not sufficiently set out the reasons why, in his particular case, transfers of his personal data, on the basis of the DPF to a DPF-certified business in the US, would cause him serious harm, especially considering that, under certain conditions, transfers of personal data to the US already are permitted based on the transfer tools provided for in Articles 46 and 49 of the GDPR.

We will be monitoring closely actions against the validity of the DPF and will bring further updates here and in our DPF FAQs.

Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this article is accurate, neither its authors nor Squire Patton Boggs accepts responsibility for any errors or omissions. The content of this article is for general information only, and is not intended to constitute or be relied upon as legal advice.