International cybersecurity and data protection

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

When dealing with matters in various different jurisdictions, the Getting The Deal Through guides (GTDT) provide guidance, by way of a series of questions and answers. In the case of international cybersecurity and data protection & privacy, the GTDT guides offer important legal insight into cybersecurity and data protection & privacy in various jurisdictions, including the United States, Japan, Germany, France and China. In doing so, they address various issues, including the definition of cybersecurity in each jurisdiction, regulatory authorities responsible for enforcing cybersecurity rules, the legislative framework for the protection of personally identifiable information (PII) in each jurisdiction, as well as rules governing the transfer of PII outside the jurisdiction.

International comparator tool

The International comparator tool is designed to allow lawyers to compare legal differences across two or more jurisdictions in any given practice area. Using information from the GTDT guides, it can generate answers to your comparison requests. This is a valuable aid to uncover issues in cross-border matters and multi-jurisdictional issues.

The International comparator tool can be accessed here.

International cybersecurity

UK cybersecurity laws

For detailed information on the UK

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Corporate Crime News

Sentencing Council introduces new ancillary orders and careless driving guidelines

The Sentencing Council has introduced new guidance on ancillary orders and revised careless driving sentencing guidelines, effective 1 July 2025. The changes include guidance for six ancillary orders, now accessible within relevant sentencing guidelines and extended to Crown Court users. The careless driving guideline has been updated to align culpability factors with death and serious injury by careless driving offences and harm factors with dangerous driving guidelines. The amendments follow the Council's 2024 miscellaneous amendments consultation and aim to provide more consistent sentencing guidance.

Insolvency Service reports 11-year director ban for BBL fraud

The Insolvency Service has reported the disqualification of building contractor Tahir Haq from serving as a company director for 11 years, accompanied by mandated compensation payments totalling £58,963 (including interest and costs). Haq obtained a £50,000 bounce back loan (BBL) for Integral Maintenance Team Ltd by overstating his company's turnover by £200,000, despite the company being entitled to only around £3,000. The disqualification, effective from 1 July 2025, prohibits Haq from promoting, forming, or managing any company without prior court approval.

MHCLG announces Building Safety Regulator reforms to accelerate housebuilding

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has announced a package of reforms to the Building Safety Regulator (BSR), aimed at accelerating housebuilding and remediation work. Key changes include: (1) the introduction of a new Fast Track Process, designed to integrate building inspector and engineer capacity into the BSR to expedite the processing and review of existing newbuild cases and remediation decisions; (2) leadership changes, with Andy Roe KFSM appointed as non-executive chair of a new MHCLG shadow board, which will oversee the transition of the BSR’s functions from the Health and Safety Executive, as part of initial steps towards establishing a single construction regulator, and Charlie Pugsley named as the new Chief Executive Officer of the BSR; and (3) further investment, with the recruitment of over 100 new staff to enhance the BSR’s operational capacity.

ICO secures convictions in largest ever nuisance call investigation

The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has secured guilty verdicts against eight individuals for data protection offences following its largest ever nuisance call investigation. On 26 June 2025, Craig Cornick was found guilty at Bolton Crown Court of conspiracy to unlawfully obtain personal data contrary to the Data Protection Act, joining seven others who had previously pleaded guilty to various offences under the Data Protection Act and Computer Misuse Act. The investigation uncovered approximately one million illegally accessed vehicle repair records between 2014-2017. The defendants are scheduled to return to court on 11 July 2025 for Proceeds of Crime Act proceedings, with sentencing to follow. The ICO has indicated a second phase of investigation is ongoing, targeting insurance companies and claims management firms.

View Corporate Crime by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companiesWhy does it matter?A company that is a member of a group and has incurred any of the types of losses available for surrender by way of group relief may, without any further rules, have more than one way in which to use the loss. There are a

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?What is an appeal?An appeal in insolvency proceedings is no different to an appeal in normal litigation. An appeal will be allowed only if the appeal court is satisfied that the decision of the lower court was 'wrong' or 'unjust because of a

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the current registered owner? Or does the informal exoneration only apply to the parties to the document which informally exonerated the rentcharge?This Q&A considers the situation where, at some

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?A limited company having a share capital may not alter that share capital, except in the ways listed in section 617 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). Shares in a company cannot simply be cancelled without following an
Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companiesWhy does it matter?A company that is a member of a group and has incurred any of the types of losses available for surrender by way of group relief may, without any further rules, have more than one way in which to use the loss. There are a

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?What is an appeal?An appeal in insolvency proceedings is no different to an appeal in normal litigation. An appeal will be allowed only if the appeal court is satisfied that the decision of the lower court was 'wrong' or 'unjust because of a

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the current registered owner? Or does the informal exoneration only apply to the parties to the document which informally exonerated the rentcharge?This Q&A considers the situation where, at some

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?

Can shares in a limited company that have not been paid-up at all be cancelled?A limited company having a share capital may not alter that share capital, except in the ways listed in section 617 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). Shares in a company cannot simply be cancelled without following an