From the list of issues, we have derived sixteen “core concepts”, which can provide solutions via high-level principles and rules.

Ideally, these concepts should be abstract enough to capture many problems, with a simple rule or principle that can be included in various provisions throughout the new Regulation.

When developing these principles, we have actively considered existing mechanisms in EU law, such as instruments in procedural rules, which seem to have many common features with GDPR procedures.

Concept 1: Scope is limited to international cooperation of SAs

Article 2 of the Draft Regulation

The Regulation shall be limited to cross-country procedures. This ensures that national cases, which remain the majority of all cases, are not interfered with. Member States would still be able to fully regulate national procedures. There may be some rules that could also apply to national cases (e.g. transparency and publication of decisions), but this could be optional.


  • Minimal interference with national procedural law.
  • Higher likeliness that the Regulation will be politically accepted.


  • SAs and parties would have to apply different rules to national and cross-border cases. However, this is already the case under Article 56 and 60 to 66 GDPR.

Neutral Considerations

  • If national procedural laws are more limited than the guarantees in the Regulation, Member States may discriminate against their own residents in local cases. However, as the guarantees are mainly based on Article 6 ECHR and Article 41 CFR, this appears to be mainly an issue of problematic national laws, which may even become aligned with the Regulation over time, thereby resolving such differences.