EU-US Data Privacy Framework: Judgment Expected on 3 September
by Streamlex 8 August 2025
The EU General Court is set to rule on 3 September 2025 in the landmark case Latombe v. European Commission. The judgment could lead to the annulment of the EU-US Data Privacy Framework (DPF) — the legal basis for most transatlantic data transfers.
Why Latombe Challenges the EU-US DPF
French MP Philippe Latombe is seeking to annul the EU-US Data Privacy Framework (DPF), arguing that it doesn’t fully protect EU citizens’ personal data as required under EU law. His main concerns are:
- Bulk Data Collection: U.S. intelligence agencies can still access large amounts of EU citizens’ data, which Latombe says violates the GDPR’s principles of data minimisation and proportionality.
- Limited Remedies: The DPF’s Data Protection Review Court, the key body for complaints, lacks true independence and does not offer strong legal remedies for EU individuals.
- Procedural Issues: Latombe claims the EU failed to properly notify its Member States about the DPF, breaching EU rules.
- Other Safeguards: He also highlights weak protections against security risks and automated decisions.
Overall, Latombe argues that the DPF repeats the problems found in earlier data transfer frameworks struck down Schrems II, and fails to meet EU privacy standards.
Timeline of the EU-US DPF Legal Challenge
Date | Event |
10 July 2023 | European Commission adopts adequacy decision for the EU-US DPF, triggering new legal regime for transatlantic data transfers. |
6 September 2023 | Latombe files an application with the EU General Court (Case T-553/23), seeking annulment of the DPF decision and separately applies for interim measures to suspend the operation of the DPF. |
8 September 2023 | Latombe requests emergency judicial suspension of the DPF, citing urgency and serious harm. |
12 October 2023 | The President of the General Court dismisses Latombe’s application for interim measures, holding he had not demonstrated urgency or serious and irreparable personal harm as required under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU. |
2023–early 2025 | Written proceedings and exchanges between the parties, including detailed arguments from both Latombe and the Commission. |
1 April 2025 | Oral hearing takes place before the General Court, where both procedural admissibility (e.g., standing of Latombe as an individual applicant under Article 263 TFEU) and substantive issues (compliance with EU data protection standards) are examined. |
⭐ 3 September 2025 (upcoming) | Judgment of the General Court expected. Outcome could shape the future of the DPF and EU-US data flows depending on whether admissibility is upheld and on the substantive findings. |
What’s Next in the Latombe v. Commission Judgment?
The General Court will first assess whether Latombe has standing, a crucial procedural hurdle in EU law. If admissible, the Court may then evaluate the merits of the challenge.
The Court could invalidate the EU-US DPF, forcing companies to reconsider their transatlantic data transfer mechanisms.
However, any ruling can be appealed to the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), meaning 3 September may not be the final word.
Track DPF Developments with Streamlex
Want real-time updates on the EU-US Data Privacy Framework, legal challenges, and compliance implications?
👉 Follow Streamlex’s DPF Tracker for summaries and timely updates.
FAQ: EU-US Data Privacy Framework Case
Can the EU Court annul the DPF?
Yes. The EU General Court has the authority to invalidate the Data Privacy Framework (DPF) if it finds that the agreement breaches EU data protection law. However, any annulment decision may be appealed to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which has the final say.
What happens if the DPF is invalidated?
If the DPF is struck down, thousands of companies would lose a key legal basis for transferring personal data from the EU to the U.S. This could trigger significant legal uncertainty, much like the aftermath of the Schrems II ruling, as businesses rush to implement alternative transfer mechanisms (e.g., Standard Contractual Clauses).
How is this case different from Schrems II?
While Schrems II was based on an individual complaint that led to a preliminary reference to the CJEU, Latombe’s case is a direct annulment action against the Commission's adequacy decision. This type of challenge is procedurally different — it tests standing more strictly but could lead to a faster resolution.
What is standing in EU law?
In EU law, “standing” refers to the right to bring a case before the EU courts. To challenge an EU act, an individual must show that it directly and individually affects them, which is a high legal threshold. Standing is often a barrier for individuals seeking to annul EU legislative or regulatory measures.
Is the Data Privacy Framework still valid during the case?
Yes, the DPF remains in effect unless and until the EU General Court annuls it and that decision is upheld on appeal.
