On January 25, 2017, the U.S. President signed an Executive Order on "Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States" containing rules for government privacy policies pertaining to foreigners. This caused concerns in Europe, but should not affect the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield.
The European Commission has proposed a new Regulation on Privacy and Electronic Communications that is intended to supplement the General Data Protection Regulation.
Transparency International has launched its latest 2016 Corruption Perception Index. China’s ranking continues to improve, moving up by four places from last year’s rank of 83 to a rank this year of 79. Find out more about the other highlights.
An attorneys' data privacy initiative brought an action against the Adequacy Decision in the CJEU claiming that the Adequacy Decision of the European Commission is null and void.
After the adoption of a Leniency Programme (2011) and a Commitments Procedure (2014), the recent introduction by the Hellenic Competition Commission of a Settlement procedure consummates the procedural modernisation of Greek competition law.
After several years of development, involving input from over 50 countries, the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) has finally published ISO 37001: Anti-Bribery Management Systems Standard - a new international standard designed to assist organisations worldwide in implementing and maintaining effective anti-bribery systems.
Baker & McKenzie released the 2016 edition of its Global Overview of Anti-Bribery Handbook. You can read the Handbook for free on Global Compliance News.
As of August 1, 2016, U.S. companies can now self-certify compliance to the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield to the U.S. Department of Commerce
In VM Remonts, the EU Court of Justice ruled for the first time on whether a company can be liable for competition law infringements that resulted from the actions of a third party service provider that was not an agent of the company and was taking initiatives that clearly exceeded the tasks assigned to it.
The Dutch Supreme Court referred questions for a preliminary ruling to the European Court of Justice, asking whether certain elements of the Dutch fiscal unity regime should also be available to Dutch resident companies with a 95% or more EU resident parent, subsidiary or sister company which can not be part of a Dutch fiscal unity due to the geographical restrictions of the fiscal unity regime.