CIPP/E Notable Court Cases
.
Questions and Answers
- 1.
Which court case ruled on the right to be forgotten that search engines must remove links and results for name, address, and links/results by third parties that contain information related to that person?
- A.
Google Spain
- B.
Digital Rights Ireland
- C.
ANAF
- D.
Weltimmo
- E.
Schrems
- F.
Rynes
- G.
Tele2 Sverige and Tom Watson
Correct Answer
A. Google SpainExplanation
The ruling in the Google Spain case established the right to be forgotten, which requires search engines to remove links and results related to a person's name, address, and information provided by third parties. This case specifically dealt with Google Spain and the right to privacy of individuals in the European Union. The ruling stated that search engines are responsible for the processing of personal data and must comply with requests to remove links and results that are outdated, irrelevant, or violate an individual's privacy rights.Rate this question:
-
- 2.
Which court case ruled that the data retention directive invalid based on articles 7, 8, and 11?
- A.
Google Spain
- B.
Digital Rights Ireland
- C.
ANAF
- D.
Weltimmo
- E.
Schrems
- F.
Rynes
- G.
Tele2 Sverige and Tom Watson
Correct Answer
B. Digital Rights IrelandExplanation
The correct answer is Digital Rights Ireland. The Digital Rights Ireland case ruled that the data retention directive was invalid based on articles 7, 8, and 11.Rate this question:
-
- 3.
Which court case ruled that personal data may not be transferred between public administrative bodies without individuals being informed?
- A.
Google Spain
- B.
Digital Rights Ireland
- C.
ANAF
- D.
Weltimmo
- E.
Schrems
- F.
Rynes
- G.
Tele2 Sverige and Tom Watson
Correct Answer
C. ANAFExplanation
ANAF is the correct answer because it refers to the Romanian National Agency for Fiscal Administration. In 2018, the European Court of Justice ruled in the ANAF case that personal data cannot be transferred between public administrative bodies without individuals being informed. This decision reinforced the importance of transparency and informed consent in data transfers, ensuring that individuals have control over their personal information.Rate this question:
-
- 4.
Which court case ruled that data protection laws apply in cross border situations. Minimal activities in a member state can trigger application of member states’ data protection law?
- A.
Google Spain
- B.
Digital Rights Ireland
- C.
ANAF
- D.
Weltimmo
- E.
Schrems
- F.
Rynes
- G.
Tele2 Sverige and Tom Watson
Correct Answer
D. WeltimmoExplanation
Weltimmo is the correct answer because the court case ruled that data protection laws apply in cross border situations. It established that even minimal activities in a member state can trigger the application of member states' data protection law.Rate this question:
-
- 5.
Which court case invalidated safe harbor was adequate in transfers to the US?
- A.
Google Spain
- B.
Digital Rights Ireland
- C.
ANAF
- D.
Weltimmo
- E.
Schrems
- F.
Rynes
- G.
Tele2 Sverige and Tom Watson
Correct Answer
E. SchremsExplanation
Schrems is the correct answer because the court case known as Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner invalidated the Safe Harbor framework, which was a legal mechanism used to transfer personal data from the European Union to the United States. The case was brought by Austrian privacy activist Max Schrems, who argued that the Safe Harbor framework did not adequately protect the privacy rights of European citizens. The European Court of Justice agreed with Schrems and declared the Safe Harbor framework invalid in 2015, leading to the development of a new framework called the EU-US Privacy Shield.Rate this question:
-
- 6.
Which court case ruled that indiscriminate retention of data even for fighting crime is incompatible with eprivacy directive?
- A.
Google Spain
- B.
Digital Rights Ireland
- C.
ANAF
- D.
Weltimmo
- E.
Schrems
- F.
Rynes
- G.
Tele2 Sverige and Tom Watson
Correct Answer
G. Tele2 Sverige and Tom WatsonExplanation
The court case Tele2 Sverige and Tom Watson ruled that indiscriminate retention of data, even for fighting crime, is incompatible with the eprivacy directive.Rate this question:
-
- 7.
Which court case ruled that a CCTV recording the public does not fall under the household exemption?
- A.
Google Spain
- B.
Digital Rights Ireland
- C.
ANAF
- D.
Weltimmo
- E.
Schrems
- F.
Rynes
- G.
Tele2 Sverige and Tom Watson
Correct Answer
F. RynesExplanation
The court case that ruled that a CCTV recording the public does not fall under the household exemption is Rynes.Rate this question:
-
Quiz Review Timeline +
Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.
-
Current Version
-
Mar 21, 2023Quiz Edited by
ProProfs Editorial Team -
Apr 29, 2020Quiz Created by
Randy
Back to top