Pioneer 1507: Is it a sci-fi toy? Is it a Star Wars sub-plot? Or is it food?

 Last week a majority of EU member states voted against an extension of GMO food in the EU but it is the Commission that will make the final decision. Which way will the Commission swing? EU Perspectives investigates. The decision to approve Pioneer 1507  rests no longer with the Member States or the Parliament. It …

Continue reading Pioneer 1507: Is it a sci-fi toy? Is it a Star Wars sub-plot? Or is it food?

“Eat well – feel good” – EU campaign encouraging children to eat fruit and drink milk at odds with their policy on crystalline fructose and isoglucse

This week saw a number of alarming reports relating to obesity. Firstly, the WHO published a report warning that obesity (alongside smoking and alcohol consumption) could lead to a 70% increase in the rates of cancers being diagnosed over the next twenty years. Secondly, Public Health England reported that two-thirds of the UK are overweight. …

Continue reading “Eat well – feel good” – EU campaign encouraging children to eat fruit and drink milk at odds with their policy on crystalline fructose and isoglucse

The High Court accepts jurisdiction in ‘Safari users’ [Vidal-Hall et al v Google] case. European privacy rules bolstered?

Equity, the common-law and civil law all beginning to catch up with Google’s misuse of private information. How much longer, one wonders, will the recent on-line buisiness model of profiting from private information last?

gavc law - geert van calster

Update October 2018 upon revisting the issues I can now add that the claim was settled before the Supreme Court heard the case.

[Postscript 26 august 2015: the UKSC granted Google leave to appeal on 28 July 2015]

[Postscript 27 March 2015: today the Court of Appeal confirmed the High Court ruling. Emma Cross has immediate analysis here.]

In Vidal-Hall et al v Google Inc, the High Court assessed its jurisdiction against Google Inc and found no reason to apply forum non conveniens. Google UK was not involved, the Jurisdiction Regulation (44/2001) does not apply.

Claimants allege that Google misused their private information, and acted in breach of confidence, and/or in breach of the statutory duties under the Data Protection Act 1998 s.4(4) (“the DPA”), by tracking and collating, without the claimants’ consent or knowledge, information relating to the claimants’ internet usage on the Apple Safari internet browser…

View original post 305 more words