EU Law analysis: Privacy activist Maximilian Schrems brought a claim against Meta Platforms Ireland (Meta) before the Austrian courts, alleging that Meta was unlawfully processing his personal data. Meta had directed targeted advertising at Schrems that reflected his interests as perceived by Meta, including his sexual orientation. The Austrian Supreme Court referred two questions to the Court of Justice. In its judgment, the Court of Justice held that principle of data minimisation prevents unrestricted aggregation, analysis and processing of personal data obtained by a data controller from data subjects or third parties for the purposes of targeted advertising. The Court of Justice also held that data concerning sexual orientation that are manifestly made public by an individual may be processed–but that this does not amount to the individual’s consent to the processing of other data relating to their sexual orientation, obtained using partner third-party websites, for the purposes of enabling personalised advertising. Written by Rohan Massey, partner, and Cameron Grabowski, trainee solicitor, at Ropes & Gray International LLP.

This Practice Note examines how authorised firms can vary consumer credit agreements, including unilateral variation powers, modifying agreements by consent, the relevant statutory and Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) rules, and the practical issues firms should consider. For further information about what constitutes a regulated consumer credit agreement and how to draft a consumer credit agreement, see Practice Notes: What is credit and when is a credit agreement regulated? and Drafting and varying consumer credit agreements. Background to consumer credit agreements Since 1 April 2014, the FCA has been responsible for the regulation of consumer credit. The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA 1974), and many of the regulations that supplement the CCA 1974 remain in force; however, certain sections have been repealed, amended or supplemented to fall within the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA 2000) and the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001, SI 2001/544 (RAO) regime. This means that the rules governing the variation of consumer credit agreements are set out in the CCA 1974 and the Consumer Credit sourcebook

Law360: A London tribunal has dismissed e-money issuer Nvayo's application to suspend a UK financial regulator's restrictions on its services, finding insufficient evidence that 'the public at large' would not be prejudiced if its business were to resume.

A covenant requiring the covenantor not to do the thing specified. The burden of a restrictive covenant binds successors in title where there is land benefiting from the covenant, the burden of the covenant was intended to run, and the successor to the covenantor has notice of the covenant.

An obligation arising out of a deed to refrain from doing some act on land belonging to the covenantor.

Property Disputes analysis: A covenant was discharged where the consent of the covenantee to plans was required and it had ceased to exist.

A clause in a contract which places certain restrictions on the business activities of an employee for a period of time after his employment with the employer.

A covenant requiring the covenantor not to do the thing specified. In order to be enforceable, such provisions should be reasonable and necessary for the protection of the target company’s/target business’ legitimate business interests. Restrictive covenants in a SPA/APA restrict the seller’s activities during an agreed period so that the buyer can try and protect the value of the target company/target business being acquired.

This Practice Note summarises the legal principles and provides practical guidance on the enforceability of restrictive covenants and the application of the doctrine of restraint of trade in commercial contracts. Post-termination restrictions in employment contracts are likely to be scrutinised to a greater extent than restrictions in commercial agreements and so, generally, parties to a commercial agreement are likely to have greater flexibility to contract than parties to an employment contract. However, each restriction should be considered in its context. See What is reasonable? below. For information on restrictive covenants in an employment context, see Practice Note: Restrictive covenants in employment—a guide to our materials. For information on restrictive covenants in a property context (which is outside the scope of this Practice Note), see: Restrictive covenants—overview and Restrictive covenants for property disputes lawyers—overview. What is the doctrine of restraint of trade? The common law seeks to protect the freedom of parties to trade but balances this against their freedom to contract. Generally speaking, the tension between these two competing freedoms is

This Practice Note contains links to materials relating to employee competition and confidentiality, including post-termination restrictions (restrictive covenants). Materials that relate to employee competition and confidentiality refer throughout to 'post-termination restrictions' rather than 'restrictive covenants'. Our documentation relating to employee competition and confidentiality is covered under three topics: • Employee duties and restrictions on competition: this subtopic examines the duties that an employee owes to their employer, in particular how these relate to the extent to which an employee may compete with their current or former employer • Determining whether restrictions are enforceable: this subtopic considers the issues that arise when construing restrictions, and hence the issues that should be considered when drafting post-termination restrictions • Confidentiality, duties and restrictions: enforcement: materials in this subtopic focus on the practical steps that an employer may take when enforcing employee duties, eg in relation to confidential information, and on the process for, and remedies available in, court proceedings The full list of all documents available under those three topics is set out below. Employee

The National Trust’s statutory power to enforce restrictive covenants In addition to the National Trust’s power to enforce restrictive agreements and covenants benefiting its land in the same manner as any other landowner, it also has statutory powers to enforce restrictive covenants entered into by them with persons interested in land against their successors in title even though the National Trust may have no land capable of being benefited by those covenants. Under section 8 of the National Trust Act 1937 (NTA 1937), the National Trust can: • enter into an agreement with, or take a covenant from, any person who is able to bind land so that the land is subject, permanently or for a specified period, to conditions restricting its planning, development or use in any manner, and • enforce that agreement or covenant against anyone deriving title under the other party to that agreement or covenant to the same extent as if the National Trust were possessed of or entitled to or interested in adjacent land and as if the agreement or covenant

Restrictive covenants are frequently imposed when land is divided so that future development requires the consent of: • the original seller, or • the original seller and its successors in title Whose consent is required? Covenants frequently provide that the buyer and its successors in title must have plans approved before a development can go ahead. In some cases, the requirement for consent is limited to the original seller, so that the covenant becomes unenforceable if that person no longer exists (eg where an individual has died, or a company has been wound up or liquidated). Although some early cases found that such covenants became absolute, in Crest Nicholson, Neuberger J (as he then was) found that a covenant requiring plans to be submitted for approval to the vendor company was discharged when the company ceased to exist and his decision was approved (obiter) by the Court of Appeal. In Veee Ltd, the UT took the view that the intention of the parties to the transfer imposing the covenant must have been for the