The meaning of ‘adequacy’: Implications of the draft Korea decision
Graham Greenleaf analyses what the EU is effectively looking for – it appears that the absence of some of the GDPR elements does not stand in the way of a positive finding.
The European Commission’s draft adequacy Decision concerning the Republic of Korea(1) will be the third such decision under the GDPR, once finalised. (It follows those concerning Japan (2019) and the United Kingdom (2021)). The decision is significant not only for its practical implications for Korea, but also for what it adds to our emerging understanding of how “adequacy” is being interpreted under the GDPR. The CJEU’s decision in Schrems II and the EDPB’s Adequacy Referential(2) must also be considered.
|This article consists of extracts from the author’s submission to EU authorities concerning the Decision. For a copy of the full submission, please contact the author at firstname.lastname@example.org|
International Report subscribers please login to access the full article.
If you wish to subscribe please see our subscription information.