Canadian organizations should monitor the agreement, as well as negotiations on CLOUD Act agreements between the United States and other jurisdictions. This involves familiarizing yourself with how the new system between the UK and the US will work and understanding the processes and procedures for responding to foreign agency electronic data production orders in the context of relatively short expectations. The SSAs set the conditions for the electronic exchange of customs and postal data, including: the agreement will remain in force for five years and the number of oOP, their fertility and the success of each challenge will show whether it proves to be as useful as it has been proclaimed. As things stand, no OPOs have been put in place and the absence of “teeth” may mean that law enforcement agencies may have to resort to the previously used and cumbersome GW procedure. OPO is new and perhaps imperfect, but it is part of a desire to ensure faster and less bureaucratic access to data relevant to criminal investigations. Although the EU has not yet been concluded, the EU is currently negotiating a similar agreement with the US for the creation of a European Production Order (CEPOL), recognizing that more than half of criminal investigations include a cross-border request for access to electronic evidence. Imperfect or not, OPOs or similar powers are here to stay in one form or another. Although data access agreements are in place in the United States under the U.S. Cloud Act, OPO regulations and all future EPO executives may differ, so companies with branches in different legal systems must familiarize themselves with both. Under a new “Landmark” data exchange agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom, U.K.
enforcement agencies can now obtain an injunction against a person in the United States or his activities in the United States for production or access to electronic data. A data-sharing agreement is an agreement between a party with useful data (the Discloser) and a party that searches for data for research on (the recipient) under which the public agrees to share its data with the recipient. These could be two universities that agree to share data for research cooperation, one or more private companies active in research or development, and even a government agency working with a private agency. It is important to note that there is nothing in the 2019 agreement or law that requires the recipient of an OPO to comply with an OPO. It simply requires the United Kingdom and the United States to remove barriers of domestic law that would otherwise prevent the disclosure of data. On the contrary, non-compliance with an OPO must be considered as non-compliance with a national production regime: a breach of the court`s civil law. For an OPO recipient, this may provide some consolation because, as the Supreme Court has confirmed, a civil court does not constitute an extradition offence. It should be taken into account, however, that the LGG procedure remains available to the authorities of the United Kingdom and the United States and that it would ultimately involve an injunction from a national court.