<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 08/04/14 19:06, Francis Davey wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAEWR3kvnS3_TWEXWY4pj9Kc=b+vWgtm5vpAp8St+wLppYKtu3Q@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">2014-04-08 16:52 GMT+01:00 Roland
            Perry <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                href="mailto:lists@internetpolicyagency.com"
                target="_blank">lists@internetpolicyagency.com</a>></span>:<br>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">From
              another list:<br>
              <br>
              "There is no automatic annulment of the national
              legislation on data<br>
              retention, it is up to the member states to abrogate or
              modify their<br>
              rules"<br>
              <br>
              <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/2014/04/08/the-annulment-of-%0Athe-data-retention-directive-and-the-messy-consequences-on-national-%0Alegislations/"
                target="_blank">http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/2014/04/08/the-annulment-of-<br>
the-data-retention-directive-and-the-messy-consequences-on-national-<br>
                legislations/</a>><br>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>But uninteresting to our discussion. It is discussing
              whether _as a matter of EU law_ transposition measures are
              void after the finding of invalidity of a directive they
              transpose.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>But the effect of UK or English law is likely to be
              more important. This is because the regulations were made
              under s.2(2) powers. As far as I can see this means that
              the invalidity of the directive means that the regulations
              are invalid ab initio. If (on the other hand) the rules on
              data retention had been made by UK Act of Parliament, then
              they would not have depended on a directive to be valid
              and so would not be void in the same way.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>(Of course - and this is a different discussion - the
              UK might be prevented by other laws, such as the data
              protection directive or the CFR, from passing such an Act
              and then it might be possible to have it disapplied under
              the Factortame principle).</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Someone pointed me to: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                href="http://dare.uva.nl/document/102647">http://dare.uva.nl/document/102647</a>
              which comes to the same conclusion.</div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    This likely relevant but not a quick or easy read <br>
    <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/qcs_opinion_on_data_retention_in">https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/qcs_opinion_on_data_retention_in</a><br>
    <br>
    Caspar<br>
  </body>
</html>