Predicted surge in data privacy litigation claims
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in May that individuals can seek compensation for non-material damages resulting from General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) violations. In this article we consider the potential implications for insurers.
The case
The case considered an Austrian citizen who sued the country’s postal service for processing their data without their consent. The Claimant sought reparations for ‘non-material damage’ under GDPR’s liability regime, alleging that they had been caused substantial distress. In its defence the postal service asserted that the Claimant data subject had not suffered sufficient damage.
The national court was unsure as to the extent to which compensation rights for non-material damages apply under GDPR’s Article 82, so it referred the case to the ECJ.
ECJ decision
The ECJ ruled that:
‘Not every infringement of the GDPR gives rise, in itself, to a right of compensation’.
However, there is no requirement for non-material damage to reach a certain threshold of seriousness to confer a right to compensation. As such, data subjects seeking compensation for GDPR breaches can do so without proving that a specific threshold for the seriousness of the harm is met. It is then for national courts to decide on the appropriate level of damages.
Considerations for insurers
Despite the claimant still having to prove a GDPR violation and a causal link between the violation and the harm, this decision could result in an increase in data privacy claims against businesses.
However, this case must be balanced against the case of Lloyd v Google, in which the Supreme Court held that a mere loss of control over data does not automatically result in compensation. Indeed, the ruling of the ECJ is not binding on English courts following Brexit. Nevertheless, the decision could still be persuasive and influential in judges’ decision making in the UK. As such, insurers and underwriters should consider the scope of coverage they offer to policy holders, particularly under management liability, professional indemnity and cyber wordings, where cover for data privacy claims is often provided.
Additionally, insurers may also wish to consider incorporating tighter conditions into their wordings in relation to GDPR compliance.
Contents
Key contact
Tim Johnson
Partner
tim.johnson@brownejacobson.com
+44 (0)115 976 6557
You may be interested in...
You may be interested in...
Legal Update
Walking the fine line: The statutory duty of candour and insurance
Legal Update
FCA launches consultation on broker remuneration for multi-occupancy buildings insurance
Legal Update
AI is creating fraudulent claims
Legal Update
Shoplifting epidemic by organised criminal gangs: The impact for insurers
Legal Update
Death and disgrace policies: What can insurers learn about the allegations against Gregg Wallace?
Legal Update
Insurance complaints surge continues
Legal Update
Embedding social value in procurement
Legal Update
Navigating workplace sexual harassment laws during the festive season
Opinion
Revolutionising the Workforce: Impact of Get Britain Working White Paper
Legal Update - London Market Quarterly
London Market Quarterly December 2024: An eye on what the market needs to know
Published Article
Johnson et al v FirstRand Bank: Judgment sends warning across financial services intermediation
Opinion
Balancing employer flexibility and employee rights
Legal Update
The ‘grate’ cheese robbery: Implications for insurance professionals
Legal Update
Environmental crime and the impact for insurers
Legal Update
Carbon fraud prompts insurance response
Legal Update
What might a Trump victory mean for the UK insurance industry?
Legal Update
Post Office scandal: Lessons for underwriters
Legal Update
Weather protection parametric insurance: A sign of things to come?
Legal Update
Building an inclusive workplace: Strategies for attracting and retaining disabled talent
On-Demand
Kinship care: DJ v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council and SG
Legal Update
After a pause, Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL) regulation becomes one step closer
Legal Update
Updates to the UK’s Arbitration Bill
Legal Update
Ozempic: The rising costs and coverage issues of weight loss medication
Legal Update - Employment Rights Bill
What does the Employment Rights Bill mean for employment practices liability insurance?
Legal Update
ICAEW: Changes to PII requirements
Legal Update
Contractor insolvency: Peabody Trust v NHBC
Legal Update
Insurability by design: Increased transparency for vehicle manufacturers and insurers
Legal Update
By a narrow 2 to 1 majority, the Court of Appeal finds in favour of insurers in the construction of an exclusion clause in a W&I policy
Legal Update
Organisational approaches to ESG and sustainability matters
Legal Update
LMA binders’ consultation
Legal Update
Smooth sailing ahead: The LMA's new Open Form Default Clause
Legal Update
PFAS: The issue that won’t go away
Legal Update
Oklahoma earthquake: Racial discrimination in adjudication
Legal Update
Will the Online Safety Act help reduce Google ad spoofing in insurance?
Legal Update
Vicarious liability for kinship foster carer abuse: Implications for local authority insurers
Legal Update
Latest short-term insurance trends
Legal Update
Motor finance complaints on hold: Why now is the time for strategic action
Published Article
General insurance claims part 3: evidence of the insurance markets’ learnings from the consumer duty
Legal Update
Artificial intelligence putting the ‘actuarial defence’ to the test?
