This note explores the holding, context and aftermath of the judgments which declared the so-called ʻimmigration exceptionʼ set out in the UK Data Protection Act 2018 incompatible with, and assumed it subject to, the (UK) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) restrictions clause (article 23). The subsequent limitation of this exemption's use to the government is impactful in itself. However, this case has much wider significance. Firstly, the finding that the restrictions clause mandates granular specificity places in jeopardy many exemptions not only in the UK but also in EU States. Secondly, the assumption that this article was engaged is questionable since, as reworded post-Brexit, it is restricted to limitations laid down in delegated legislation. Nevertheless, this rewording depended on powers limited to addressing post-Brexit technical ʻdeficienciesʼ and so is ultra vires. The Court of Appeal should have addressed this in order to vindicate the rule of law and separation of powers.

中文翻译：

---

英国 GDPR、移民例外和英国脱欧：审讯开放权利组织诉内政部国务卿及其后果

本说明探讨了宣布 2018 年英国数据保护法中规定的所谓“移民例外”不符合并假定其受（英国）通用数据保护条例 (GDPR) 限制的判决的持有、背景和后果条款（第 23 条）。随后限制政府使用此豁免本身就具有影响力。然而，这个案例具有更广泛的意义。首先，限制条款要求细粒度的特殊性的发现不仅在英国而且在欧盟国家都危及许多豁免。其次，这篇文章的假设是有问题的，因为正如英国脱欧后改写的那样，它仅限于授权立法中规定的限制。尽管如此，越权。上诉法院应该解决这个问题，以证明法治和权力分立是正确的。