Margarita Peristeraki

European Networks Law & Regulation Quarterly, Volume 3 (2015), Issue 2, Page 122 - 128

Spiros Tassis, Margarita Peristeraki

European Networks Law & Regulation Quarterly, Volume 2 (2014), Issue 3, Page 244 - 252

Annotation on the Judgment of the Court of Justice of 13 May 2014, in Case C-131/12 Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD) and Mario Costeja González Electronic networks’ governance is becoming increasingly complex and constitutes a field of conflict between several jurisdictions, particularly the US and the EU. The information transferred through these networks is vast,mostly unfiltered and flows in an intangible area defined as “cyberspace”. The Courts’ recent judgment in the Google case aims at setting the boundaries to what search engine operators can and cannot do in the EU when their activities have implications to data protection rules, by determining (i) the territorial scope of such rules, (ii) the characterization of the activity of an internet search engine operator and (iii) the relevance of the “right to be forgotten” in this context. In a nutshell, the Court found that when it comes to non-EU based search engine operators, the mere existence of an affiliated company in the EU that sells ads associated with the search engine giant creates a presence in this territory and a data processor within the scope of the relevant EU Directive.

Margarita Peristeraki

European Networks Law & Regulation Quarterly, Volume 1 (2013), Issue 1, Page 81 - 87

On 20 September 2012, the General Court of the EU (“Court”) annulled a decision by the European Commission (“Commission”),1 which had found that Greece violated EU rules by preserving special (quasi exclusive) access rights for the mining and exploitation of lignite in favour of the State-owned electricity incumbent, Dimosia Epicheirisi Ilektrismou AE (“DEI”).