Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom

Related Glossary Terms

CASE STUDY

“LexisNexis is great as I can find the answers I am looking for really quickly. I believe that nothing should be more than 6 clicks away - and the products from LexisNexis deliver on this standard”

Avensure

Access all documents on Direct concern

Direct concern meaning

Published by a LexisNexis EU Law expert
What does Direct concern mean?
Direct concern describes, in EU litigation practice, the required causal link showing that an EU measure directly affects a claimant’s legal position without further steps. It is a standing (admissibility) criterion for non-privileged applicants (natural or legal persons) bringing an annulment action before the General Court under Article 263(4) TFEU. Defined chiefly by CJEU case law, an act is of direct concern where it both: (1) produces immediate legal effects on the applicant; and (2) leaves no discretion to addressees or implementing authorities, so its application is automatic and inevitable, without intervening measures. Direct concern is paired with other standing routes. A person may challenge: acts addressed to them; acts of direct and individual concern; or regulatory acts of direct concern that do not entail implementing measures (where individual concern is not required). Typical contexts include EU sanctions listings, anti-dumping or customs measures that apply automatically, and certain competition or financial services acts with immediate effect. This is an EU law concept. Domestic judicial review in England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland applies a “sufficient interest” test for standing, not “direct concern”. However, Irish parties and UK-based businesses can still invoke direct concern when challenging EU acts before the EU...
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about Direct concern

NEWS
Grindr High Court group claim alleges unlawful adtech sharing of HIV status and other special category data

Austen Hays announced it has filed a claim in the High Court, asserting that Grindr violated data protection rules by unlawfully handling and disclosing users’ 'highly sensitive' medical information to third parties without permission. According to the firm, advertising partners including Localytics and Apptimize received private data from Grindr’s users between May 2018 and April 2020, and potentially for a longer period, the firm added in its claim. Founded in 2009, the app calls itself 'the largest social networking app for gay, bi, trans and queer people', claiming 'millions of daily users' who use its location-based technology to connect across more than 190 countries. Austen Hays said the breaches enabled a 'potentially unlimited number' of third parties to direct advertisements at users and tailor those promotions. These third parties either delivered adverts themselves or operated as so-called adtech intermediaries, with the potential to pass data on to additional entities. The allegations concern data protection law...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
CJEU Advocate General backs admissibility of WhatsApp’s direct challenge to EDPB Article 65 decision, potentially opening the door to Meta’s pending appeals

Meta Platforms’ WhatsApp Ireland should be permitted to challenge a decision by a group of EU data protection authorities at the EU courts, because it was ‘directly concerned’ by that decision, a legal opinion for the Court of Justice of the European Union states. Advocate General Tamara Ćapeta of the EU Court of Justice, in a non-binding opinion (see here), advised the EU’s top court should find action for annulment admissible and refer the case back to the General Court. The case arises from a dispute over a decision of Ireland’s Data Protection Commission. In August 2021, the DPC fined WhatsApp €225m for failing to meet transparency duties under the General Data Protection Regulation. The opinion says ‘the appellant is directly concerned by’ the European Data Protection Board’s decision and ‘the contested decision is of individual concern to the appellant’...

Read More Right Arrow
NEWS
UK Online Safety Act: Narrow overseas cooperation list in 2024 draft Regulations for Ofcom prompts parliamentary concern; expansion and reciprocity promised as Lords debate looms

Questions from parliamentarians surfaced today after the UK’s Ofcom received a notably short roster of foreign counterparts for co‑operation formally announced under the new OSA 2023. Ministers offered assurances that additional nations will follow, and that such arrangements will lessen the burden for supervisors and those they regulate alike. The draft Online Safety (List of Overseas Regulators) Regulations 2024 would expand Ofcom’s international co‑operation powers, enabling continuation within the framework of the Act. It authorises the regulator to share online safety information with overseas peers to support oversight online and assist criminal investigation efforts. However, the recognised equivalents presently comprise authorities from France, the Netherlands, Germany, Ireland and Australia, plus the European Commission, which is now assuming a direct online safety role via Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, the EU Digital Services Act too...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Direct concern

PRACTICE NOTES
School fees and educational expenses: court orders, applications under MCA 1973/CPA 2004 and Schedule 1 Children Act 1989, and CMS variations (England and Wales)

Practice Note This Practice Note sets out guidance on the court’s authority to order periodical payments and/or lump sums covering school fees and other educational or training outgoings. It outlines the steps to be taken in matters involving parents who are or have been married or in a civil partnership, as well as in situations where the parents have never been married or in a civil partnership, and prescribes the process to follow. Significant limits apply to the court’s ability to make periodical payment orders for a child where the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) has, or would have, competence to carry out a maintenance calculation. Even so, the court still has power to direct that a parent, or any person who has treated the relevant child as a child of the family, must pay or contribute towards the expense of a child receiving instruction at an educational institution, or undertaking training for a trade, profession, or vocation (whether or not in paid work). Most frequently, such directions concern the...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Assertiveness for Lawyers: Recognise Triggers, Use Transactional Analysis, Quick Fixes, and Lessons from Success and Failure

Communicating your viewpoint with calm assurance is vital for any legal professional, yet many of us at times feel far from assertive. This Practice Note sets out what may trigger fluctuations in your assertiveness and what you can do to support yourself. What is assertiveness? People often speak about assertiveness without clearly stating what they mean. Collins defines it as ‘the quality of being able to express one’s opinions or desires in a clear and direct manner’. Assertiveness involves trusting yourself and standing up for your own rights while still respecting the rights of others. It is founded on the belief that other people’s needs and rights are just as important as our own. Assertive individuals can express themselves confidently, explain their position and what outcome they want, without slipping into passive, aggressive or manipulative behaviour. Those with strong assertiveness skills show genuine interest in and care for others. They have high self‑esteem and faith in themselves, which they project without overwhelming anyone. Such people communicate their...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Brussels I (recast) insurance jurisdiction: Articles 10–16, weaker‑party protection, direct actions, subrogation, jurisdiction agreements, lis pendens and post‑Brexit application—England and Wales [Archived]

E&W Brussels I (recast)—dealing with insurance matters [Archived] ARCHIVED : This Practice Note is archived and is not being maintained. It assists in identifying which EU Member state’s courts hold jurisdiction to determine an insurance claim. In particular, it examines the amendments in Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), insofar as they concern insurance. Those provisions are found in Chapter II, Section 3, Articles 10–15 of the Regulation. The Note reviews the basic principle that a defendant is to be sued in the state of their domicile, together with departures from that principle when the insured—treated as the weaker party—is involved. It also surveys the position where the parties are on an equal footing. Further safeguards are discussed where there could otherwise be tacit prorogation of jurisdiction, as well as the effect of an agreed jurisdiction clause in an insurance dispute. The Practice Note includes Court of Justice rulings that post-date the UK’s exit from the EU. For guidance on how these should be applied, see Impact of UK’s...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Precedents about Direct concern

PRECEDENTS
High-risk Clients and Matters: Quarterly AML/CTF and Counter-proliferation Financing Review and Action Plan (UK Law Firms)

1 General information Review timeframe [ Insert review period ] Review date [ Insert date ] Individual(s) carrying out the review [ Insert name(s) ] 2 Data Total count of high-risk clients [ Insert number ] Total count of high-risk matters [ Insert number ] Total count of these that pertain to PEPs [ Insert number ] Total count of these that concern false or stolen identification documentation [ Insert number ] Total count of these that involve sanctioned entities [ Insert number ] Total count of these that present a proliferation financing concern [ Insert number ] Total count of these that involve clients who are beneficiaries of life insurance policies where the retainer has a direct link to the policy [ Insert number ] Total count of these that concern clients seeking residence/citizenship rights of a state in exchange for investments in that state [ Insert number ] Total...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Q&As about Direct concern

Q&As
HR policy acknowledgements: legal duty and e-signature validity

It can be useful to review, in sequence, the following key points: the obligation in section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996) to issue a written statement of employment particulars the terms of the contract of employment an employer’s Human Resource (HR)-related policies the use of electronic signatures Written statement of employment particulars Under ERA 1996, s 1(1), an employer must also provide a worker with a written statement setting out the specified particulars of employment identified in ERA 1996, s 1(3) and (4). For more detailed guidance on this duty, see Practice Note: Written statements of employment particulars. Where the particulars concern sick leave and pay, other paid leave, pension rights and training, the statement may instead direct the worker to another document that is reasonably accessible (ERA 1996, ss 1(4)(d)(ii)–(iii), 1(4)(l) and 2(2))...

Read More Right Arrow