Search Legal Cases
United States v. Microsoft Corp. (Law Enforcement Cross-Border Data Access)
Privacy International filed an amicus brief to the United States Supreme Court challenging law enforcement access to personal data stored abroad
Tele2/Watson
A landmark case before the European Court of Justice on communications data retention where PI had intervened.
Szabo v. Hungary (Hungary Mass Surveillance)
Privacy International intervened in a case before the European Court of Human Rights successfully challenging the unfettered use of surveillance measures as part of anti-terrorism legislation
Apple v FBI
Privacy International filed an amicus curiae brief outlining the international implications of eroding safety features on mobile phones
European Commission's review of the Amazon/iRobot merger
Our intervention before the EU competition regulator in its review of the merger between Amazon and iRobot
Doe v. Cisco
Privacy International filed an amicus brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a case challenging the use of Cisco technology for the persecution of the Falun Gong minority in China.
Challenge against Clearview AI in Europe
This legal challenge relates to complaints filed with 5 European data protection authorities against Clearview AI, Inc. ("Clearview"), a facial recognition technology company building a gigantic database of 10 billion + faces.
(Still) Challenging mass interception from outside the UK: Wieder and Guarnieri v the UK
Two individuals applied to the European Court of Human Rights to challenge a UK tribunal’s refusal to investigate UK intelligence agencies’ interference with their right to privacy.
Complaint against Doctissimo
This legal challenge relates to a complaint filed in 2020 with the French data protection authority (CNIL) against Doctissimo, a popular French health site.
(Still) Challenging mass interception from the UK: HRW and others v UK
The applicants challenged the UK’s mass interception regime following PI’s campaign and support. As part of a friendly settlement reached by the parties in this case, the UK government admits that they violated the applicants’ rights to privacy and freedom of expression.