European Union: The EU Article 29 Working Party’s Draft Contractual Clauses For Processor-To-Subprocessor Data Transfers

Last Updated: 15 May 2014
Article by Olivier Proust

On March 21, 2014, the EU Article 29 Data Protection Working Party (''WP 29'') issued a working document (''WP 214'') proposing new contractual clauses for cross-border data transfers between an EU-based processor and a non-EU-based subprocessor (''Draft Model Clauses''). This document addresses the situation where personal data are initially transferred by a controller to a processor within the EU and then subsequently transferred by the processor to a subprocessor located outside the EU.

Back in 2010, the European Commission adopted a revised version of its model clauses for transfers between a controller in the EU and a processor outside the EU, partly to integrate new provisions on subprocessing (see analysis at WDPR, July 2010, page 32). However, it deliberately chose not to apply these new model clauses to situations whereby a processor established in the EU and performing the processing of personal data on behalf of a controller established in the EU subcontracts its processing operations to a subprocessor established in a third country.

Absent Binding Corporate Rules and the U.S-EU Safe Harbor Program, many EU data processors were left with few options for transferring data outside the EU. This issue is particularly relevant in the context of a growing digital economy where more and more companies are transferring their data to cloud computing service providers that are often based outside the EU. Negotiating ad hoc model clauses on a case-by-case basis with national data protection authorities (''DPAs'') seemed to be the only solution available.

Then, in 2012, Spain's DPA adopted a specific set of standard contractual clauses for processor-to-subprocessor transfers, and put in place a new procedure allowing data processors based in Spain to obtain authorizations for transferring data processed on behalf of their customers (data controllers) to subprocessors based outside the EU (see report at WDPR, December 2012, page 28).

The WP 29 was inspired to use the Spanish model as a basis for preparing draft ad hoc model clauses for transfers from an EU data processor to a non-EU subprocessor that could be used by any processor established in the EU.

While these Draft Model Clauses are most welcome, it remains to be seen whether the European Commission will formally adopt new model clauses for processors and how effective they will be in practice.



The Draft Model Clauses provide a new set of contractual clauses aimed at facilitating data transfers between an EU processor (acting on behalf of an EU controller) and a non-EU subprocessor.


The overall structure and content of these draft clauses are similar to those that already exist under the controller-to-processor model clauses, but they have been adapted to the context of transfers between a processor and a subprocessor.

Most of the clauses under the Draft Model Clauses replicate the existing controller-to-processor model clauses, but at times they are ill-adapted to data transfers between an EU processor and a non-EU subprocessor (as discussed further below).

Framework Contract

Under the Draft Model Clauses, the EU data processor would have to sign a Framework Contract with its controller. The Framework Contract contains a detailed list of obligations (16 in total) specified in the Draft Model Clauses — including restrictions on onward subprocessing.

This obligation is based on Article 17 of the EU Data Protection Directive (95/46/EC), which requires controllers to enter into an agreement with any data processor that is acting on their behalf. The practical effect of this could be to see the service terms between controllers and their EU processors expand to include a substantially greater number of data protection commitments, all with a view to facilitating future extra-EU transfers by EU processors to international subprocessors under these model clauses.


Subprocessing by the EU Processor

The EU processor would be required to obtain its controller's prior written approval in order to subcontract data processing activities to non-EU processors. It would be up to the controller to decide, under the Framework Contract, whether to grant a general consent up front for all subprocessing activities, or whether a specific case-by-case approval would be required each time the EU processor intended to subcontract its activities.

Depending on the terms agreed upon between the controller and the EU processor, this clause could be seen as either an advantage or a burden. Where there was express recognition for a general approval consent to subcontract, this would allow EU processors to build this into their standard terms with their customers. On the other hand, if the controller authorized subcontracting on a case-by-case basis, this could create an unnecessary burden on EU processors that would have to sign the Draft Model Clauses with the non-EU processor and obtain prior approval from the controller under the Framework Contract in order to transfer personal data outside the European Economic Area (''EEA''). This would put EU processors at a significant economic disadvantage compared with non-EU processors, which could receive the data directly from the controller (by entering into controller-to-processor model clauses) and find themselves less exposed to EU compliance requirements.

Subprocessing by the Non-EU Processor

The non-EU processor could not subcontract any of its processing operations without the prior written approval of the controller or the EU processor given on behalf and according to the instructions of the controller. Any non-EU subprocessor would be contractually bound by the same obligations (including the technical and organizational security measures) as those imposed on the EU processor under the Framework Contract.

Here again, this clause would be more or less burdensome, depending on how it was negotiated between the controller and the EU processor. In most situations, these terms would turn into a flowed down general permission for the non-EU processor to subcontract in service terms with the EU processor. But, nevertheless, some non-EU processors could find these terms onerous and be reluctant to enter into an agreement with EU processors for that reason.

List of Subprocessing Agreements

The EU processor would be required to keep an updated list of all subprocessing agreements concluded and notified to it by its non-EU subprocessor at least once per year, and would have to make this list available to the controller, which, in turn, would have to make this list available to the competent DPA.

In practice, most multinational organizations are never in contact with their subcontractors beyond the initial processor to which they have outsourced their activities. The business reality is that, as service providers become more specialized, companies tend to outsource their processing activities more frequently, thus adding more parties to the chain of contracts. Therefore, this clause could impose administrative burdens on companies that might not all be able to comply.

Third Party Beneficiary Clause

Depending on the situation, the data subject would have three options to enforce model clause breaches against data processing parties to it — initially against the exporting EU data processor (where the controller had factually disappeared or had ceased to exist in law), the importing non-EU data processor (where both the controller and the EU data processor had factually disappeared or had ceased to exist in law), or any subsequent subprocessor (where the controller, the exporting EU data processor and the importing non-EU data processor had all factually disappeared or had ceased to exist in law).

Non-EU processors could be reluctant to sign a commercial deal with an EU processor if there were a risk of them being sued by EU third party beneficiaries. In practice, however, the likelihood that an EU data subject will bring an action against a company outside the EU is very slim, and therefore the risk of that happening is very low.


Audit by the Controller

The exporting EU processor would have to agree, at the request of its controller, to submit its data processing facilities for audit of the processing activities covered by the Framework Contract, which shall be carried out by the controller itself or, alternatively, an independent inspection body selected by the controller. A similar obligation would apply to non-EU processors for the processing activities covered by the ad hoc model clauses.

The recognition of third party independent audits is especially important for cloud industry businesses that — for security and operational reasons — will often be reluctant to have clients conduct on-site audits, but will typically be more comfortable holding themselves to independent third party audits.

Audit by the DPA

The DPA competent for the controller would have the right to conduct an audit of the exporting EU data processor, the importing non-EU data processor, and any subsequent subprocessor under the same conditions as those that would apply to an audit of the controller.

This clause (which already exists under the controller-to processor model clauses) is legally questionable. The powers of DPAs to conduct audits fall within the remit of their competences as defined under national law and are limited geographically to the territory of each EU member state. However, for practical reasons, it is unlikely that DPAs will ever audit companies outside the EU.

Disclosure of the Framework Contract

The controller would have to make available to the data subjects and the competent DPA upon request a copy of the Framework Contract and any subprocessing agreement, with the exception of commercially sensitive information, which may be removed.

In practice, it is questionable how many non-EU processors would be willing to sign subprocessing agreements with EU data processors on the understanding that provisions within those agreements could end up being disclosed to regulators and other third parties.

Termination of the Framework Contract

Where the exporting EU processor, the importing non-EU data processor or any subsequent subprocess or failed to fulfill its model clauses obligations, the controller would be able to suspend the transfer of data and/or terminate the Framework Contract.


The WP 29 has certainly made a commendable effort to fill in a gap in the current legal regime by proposing a new legal framework for data transfers between EU processors and non-EU processors. While this initiative certainly moves in the right direction, it remains to be seen how the business sector will react to these Draft Model Clauses.

The concept of processor-to-processor model clauses is intended to provide an alternate solution to service providers, but, given the onerous nature of these clauses, it is uncertain how effective they would be in practice.

Depending on how the Draft Model Clauses are incorporated into the service level agreements, they could impose heavy duties and obligations on EU processors, such as having to obtain the controller's prior approval before transferring the data or having to disclose the terms on which they entered into subprocessing arrangements with their own subcontractors.

In today's globalized economy, EU processors are increasingly exporting data outside the EEA and directly managing their own subcontractor chains. Therefore, if overburdened with legal obligations, EU processors could be faced with a competitive disadvantage in comparison with non-EU processors, which can receive data directly from their controllers and so find themselves less directly exposed to EU compliance requirements. The risk is that EU processors would either not want to sign these clauses, or would fail to comply with them.

One could also argue whether the current controller/ processor dichotomy is still valid in today's business world. If adopted, the draft Data Protection Regulation intended to replace the Data Protection Directive could require controllers and processors to adduce appropriate safeguards when transferring personal data outside the EEA. As a consequence, the EU compliance requirements (including restrictions on data transfers) would apply directly to EU processors without a need for them to obtain the controller's prior approval. This would also be in line with the ongoing developments on processor Binding Corporate Rules, which in fact require EU processors to provide appropriate safeguards for the data they transfer outside the EEA (see analysis at WDPR, July 2013, page 7).


The WP 29's Draft Model Clauses must be formally adopted by the European Commission before they can be used by companies. The WP 29 hopes that these Draft Model Clauses will provide an incentive to the Commission to start drafting its own processor model clauses, but it may take a while before the Commission adopts a new official set of such clauses. Meanwhile, companies cannot rely on the Draft Model Clauses to obtain approval from their DPAs to transfer data outside the EU, and so Binding Corporate Rules are effectively the only global data transfer solution available today for EU processors.

Article first appeared in Bloomberg BNA World Data Report, Volume 14, Number 4 April 2014

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.