Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica (AUC Iuridica) is a legal journal published since 1955, which presents longer essays as well as short articles on topics relevant for legal theory and international, European and Czech law. It also publishes works concerning current legislative problems.
Although intended primarily for domestic audience, AUC Iuridica is useful also for foreign experts, who can take advantage of summaries in foreign languages (English, German and French) and key words, which are systematically added to the main articles and essays.
The published articles are subject to peer reviews. If necessary, reviewed texts are sent back to the author for revision.
AUC Iuridica accepts contributions from any contributor on any current legal topic.
The journal is registered in the Czech National Bibliography (kept by the National Library of the Czech Republic) and in the Index to Foreign Legal Periodicals (kept by the American Association of Law Libraries).
The journal is archived in Portico.
AUC IURIDICA, Vol 64 No 4 (2018), 143–154
The Interpretaton of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU in Data Retention Cases: national implementation and possible changes of policy
announced: 04. 01. 2019
The Court of Justice of the EU has, on several occasions, ruled on the compatibility of so-called data retention measures with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. In particular, it has ruled that general and indiscriminate retention of certain electronic communications data is incompatible with Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter, be it in the form of EU secondary law or national legislation. Many Member States, however, still keep in place data retention measures contrary to these rulings, and progress in implementing the rulings is slow. At the same time, the rulings of the Court of Justice can also be interpreted as requiring a fundamental change in how these measures are used and how effective they can be.
keywords: Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU; data retention; national implementation; data protection
1. COUDERT, Fanny. In the aftermath of Tele2 and Opinion 1/15: when are data retention measures legitimate?. In: KU Leuven CITIP Blog [online]. 2017 [cit. 2018-05-10]. Available from: https://www.law.kuleuven.be/citip/blog/in-the-aftermath-of-tele2-and-opinion-115-when-are-data-retention-measures-legitimate/ .
2. GALLI, Francesca. Digital Rights Ireland as an Opportunity to Foster a Desirable Approximation of Data Retention Provisions. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. 2016, 23(3), p. 460-477. CrossRef
3. LUND, Jasper. EU Member States plan to ignore EU Court data retention rulings. In: EDRi [online]. 2017 [cit. 2018-05-10]. Available from: https://edri.org/eu-member-states-plan-to-ignore-eu-court-data-retention-rulings/ .
4. LYNSKEY, Orla. Deconstructing data protection: the 'added-value' of a right to data protection in the EU legal order. International & Comparative Law Quarterly. 2014, 63 (3), p. 569-597. CrossRef
5. LYNSKEY, Orla. Tele2 Sverige AB and Watson et al: Continuity and Radical Change. In: European Law Blog [online]. 2017 [cit. 2018-05-10]. Available from: https://europeanlawblog.eu/2017/01/12/tele2-sverige-ab-and-watson-et-al-continuity-and-radical-change/ .
6. MOLEK, Pavel. Czech Constitutional Court Unconstitutionality of the Czech Implementation of the Data Retention Directive; Decision of 22 March 2011, Pl. ÚS 24/10. European Constitutional Law Review. 2012, 8(2), p. 338-353. CrossRef
The Interpretaton of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU in Data Retention Cases: national implementation and possible changes of policy is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
230 x 157 mm
published: 4 x per year
print price: 65 czk