Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

EU Weighs in on Pseudonymized Data

By Liisa Thomas & Kathryn Smith on October 20, 2025
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Antitrust-Blog-Image-EU-2-660x283

A thorny issue for companies has been how to handle data derived from personal information. Is it still personal information? Do privacy laws apply? The EU Court of Justice of grappled with this issue in a September decision. The case arose following a Spanish bank’s financial difficulties. Its regulatory agency, the European Single Resolution Board, stepped in to attempt to value some of the bank’s investments and otherwise determine next steps. As part of the process, the board hired a consulting firm to analyze feedback from the bank’s shareholders and creditors. The board collected the information, pseudonymized the data, and then sent the pseudonymized data set to the consulting firm.

At issue was whether the entity should have told shareholders the sharing with the consulting firm would happen. In other words, treating the pseudonymized data as personal and following notice obligations under a privacy law applicable to entities like the board (Regulation 2018/1725, which is like GDPR but applicable to EU institutions like the board). Which, according to the Court, included telling individuals at the time information was collected, of “potential recipients of that data” (para. 108). The Court held that if pseudonymized data can be combined with other information and identify the individual, it still counts as personal data. The Court noted that this analysis should be made separately for each entity: the original company and the data recipient.

Putting It Into Practice: Knowing when personal information is no longer “personal” will impact what legal obligations apply. As courts -like the one here- often point out, this is a factual analysis, and thus develop proactive processes and procedures can be tricky. In particular, because an entity may not have a full picture of all of the different data flows or intended internal or external uses. Remembering that any organization is made up of individuals with different needs and practices can help. Consider regular check-ins and conversations with business leaders and business teams to understand their current and future data uses and needs.

Photo of Liisa Thomas Liisa Thomas

Liisa Thomas, a partner based in the Chicago and London offices, is Leader of the firm’s Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group.

Read more about Liisa ThomasEmail
Photo of Kathryn Smith Kathryn Smith

Kathryn (“Katie”) Smith is an associate in the Intellectual Property Practice Group in the firm’s Chicago office and a member of the Privacy and Cybersecurity Team. She is certified by the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) for CIPP/US.

Read more about Kathryn SmithEmail
  • Posted in:
    Privacy and Cybersecurity
  • Blog:
    Eye On Privacy
  • Organization:
    Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo