BelgiumGDPR Chapter V and Act Article 222, 4, Cross-Border Transfer Restrictions
Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Arts. 44-49; Loi du 30 juillet 2018, Art. 222, 4
In force since , effective .
A cross border transfer rule binding public and private bodies.
- Audit expectation
- continuous
- Who audits it
- Self
- Where the report goes
- Produced on request
What it requires
- Rely on an adequacy decision, Standard Contractual Clauses, Binding Corporate Rules, or a narrow Article 49 derogation before moving personal data of a person in Belgium outside the EEA; a grossly negligent or malicious breach is a criminal offense under Act Article 222, 4.
These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text. Also read by: Gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit (Belgian Data Protection Authority) (guidance, recorded ); Case C-311/18 Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland and Maximillian Schrems (Schrems II), judgment of the Court of Justice of (Grand Chamber) (recorded ).
In the frameworks
- NIST Privacy Framework
- CT.PO-P2Policies, processes, and procedures for enabling data review, transfer, sharing or disclosure, alteration, and deletion are established and in place (e.g., to maintain data quality, manage data retention).
Our reading of where this law's duties sit in each framework. It never says that running a control meets the law. How we read a framework against the law
Who enforces it
Settledness
- As of
- Case link
- https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62018CJ0311
- Guidance link
- https://www.gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit.be/professioneel/thema-s/internationaal-gegevensverkeer/overdrachten-buiten-de-eu-met-bescherming
- Case citation
- Case C-311/18 Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland and Maximillian Schrems (Schrems II), judgment of the Court of Justice of (Grand Chamber)
- Guidance body
- Gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit (Belgian Data Protection Authority)
- Open questions
- Does a transfer that relies on the adequacy decision for the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework, Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/1795, stay lawful under Article 45 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 while the appeal in Case C-703/25 P seeks its annulment?
What it makes you log
Who may demand the log
Regulator
Logging duty
Article 49(6) requires a controller or processor that transfers on the compelling-legitimate-interests derogation to document its assessment and the safeguards it supplied in the records of processing kept under Article 30. The documented items are outside the closed list of log contents. Article 47(2)(j) separately requires binding corporate rules to provide for data protection audits.
- Kind
- Explicit
- As of
- Provision
- Article 49(6) (the assessment and safeguards behind a derogation transfer are documented in the Article 30 records)
- Trigger
- personal_data_processing
What this law does
A transfer of personal data outside the EEA requires an adequacy decision, Standard Contractual Clauses, Binding Corporate Rules, or a narrow Article 49 derogation, backed by the Article 83(5) top fine tier. Belgium adds a criminal offense for the same conduct: Article 222, 4, fines a controller, processor, employee, agent, or competent authority 250 to 15,000 EUR for a Chapter V breach carried out by gross negligence or malicious intent. The Act of Article 100, 14 lets the Litigation Chamber order the suspension of cross-border data flows.
When LexLint raises it
When your app profile says your app processes personal data.
Back to the example · Lint your app
Page updated .