The Court held that general and indiscriminate data retention legislation entailed a particularly serious interference with the rights to privacy and data protection and that the user concerned is, as a result, likely to feel that their private lives are the subject of constant surveillance [100]. (europeanlawblog.eu)
He then went on to determine whether this particularly serious interference with the right to privacy was justifiable by examining, first, whether it was in accordance with the law and, secondly, whether it was proportionate. (europeanlawblog.eu)
In Australia, penalties for serious interferences with privacy can now reach up to $ 2.1 million for bodies corporate and $ 420,000 for individuals. (infogovanz.com)