EU rights and policies

This subtopic concerns matters relating to EU social and economic rights and policies, including the four freedoms underpinning the EU Internal Market:

  1. free movement of goods

  2. freedom of establishment and to provide services

  3. free movement of capital

  4. free movement of persons

Freedom of establishment and to provide services are closely related and can be regarded as, in effect, one ‘freedom’.

Social rights

Most social and employment legislation in the EU is the responsibility of individual Member States, but certain aspects of employment and social protection are affected by EU legislation. There would be no economic and social cohesion without a legal framework to ensure fair treatment for all citizens, and to ensure that businesses are not incentivised to move to areas where labour is cheaper. However, social policy is closely linked to the political ethos of national governments, so increasing competence at the EU level creates tension with Member States.

Although social policy is a shared competence, this competence has been increasingly exercised by EU institutions while stopping short of harmonising laws across the EU. Embedded into the aims

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest EU Law News

Automated decision-making and DSARs: right to access means a right to explainability (CK v Magistrat Der Stadt Wiendun & Bradstreet Austria GMBH)

Information Law analysis: The Court of Justice provided several clarifications around the scope of data subject access requests (DSARs) in the context of automated decision-making. The court held the determining factor for whether information constitutes ‘meaningful information about the logic involved’ under Article 15(1)(h) of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (EU GDPR) is whether the information enables the data subject to understand the logic involved in automated decision-making involving their personal data. The court also held disclosure by controllers should be underpinned by the principles of transparency, which requires information to be clear, accessible and intelligible, both in terms of content and form, from the perspective of data subjects. In the context of automated decision-making this doesn’t necessarily mean providing the exact algorithm, if it doesn’t help the data subject’s understanding of the ‘how’. The court confirmed DSARs do not mandate the disclosure of trade secrets, but this can only be decided by the relevant supervisory authority or competent court, after assessing all relevant information provided to them by a controller. The protection of trade secrets cannot be used as a blanket excuse by businesses to withhold certain information from individuals making a request under Article 15(1)(h) of the EU GDPR. Written by Marija Nonkovic, associate at Kemp IT Law LLP.

View EU Law by content type :

Popular documents