On 19 March 2026, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU or Court) issued its judgment in Case C-526/24, Brillen Rottler GmbH & Co. KG v TC. The case concerned a data subject who subscribed to a German optician’s newsletter and, thirteen days later, submitted an access request under Article 15 GDPR. The company refused the request, arguing it was abusive. The data subject maintained it was legitimate and claimed at least €1.000 in non-material damages.

The CJEU’s judgment addresses three questions of broad significance: (1) when a first access request can be refused as “excessive”; (2) whether a violation of the right of access alone can give rise to a compensation claim under Article 82 GDPR; and (3) how non-material damage should be assessed in that context. While the judgment is relevant to all companies subject tot GDPR, we examine below the considerations it raises for life sciences companies specifically.

Continue Reading CJEU rules on GDPR access rights and abuse of rights: what the Brillen Rottler judgment means for life sciences companies

On 16 December 2025, the European Commission published its Proposal for a Regulation establishing a framework of measures for strengthening the EU’s biotechnology and biomanufacturing sectors, particularly in the area of health (the “European Biotech Act” or the “Proposal”). The Proposal is ambitious in scope: it amends several major pieces of EU health legislation, including the Clinical Trials Regulation (“CTR”), the Veterinary Medicines Regulation, the Food Law Regulation and the Substances of Human Origin Regulation (“SoHO”), while also introducing a new framework for EU strategic projects, AI-enabled biotechnology, and biodefence.

On 10 March 2026, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) and the European Data Protection Supervisor (“EDPS”) adopted Joint Opinion 3/2026 on the Proposal (the “Joint Opinion”). While broadly supportive of the Proposal’s objectives, the EDPB and EDPS identified a number of significant data protection concerns, and issued recommendations. Although not legally binding, the Joint Opinion carries significant weight as it reflects the views of the EU’s primary data protection authorities and will directly shape the legislative debate ahead.

In this blog we examine the key data protection implications of the Proposal and the Joint Opinion for pharma and life sciences companies.

Continue Reading EDPB/EDPS Joint Opinion on the European Biotech Act Proposal: Key Data Protection Implications for Pharma and Life Sciences

Today, 6 March 2026, the Council of the European Union (“Council”) published the provisional agreement on the reform of the EU pharmaceutical legislation and the new Directive [link] and Regulation [link]. Formal adoption by the European Parliament and the Council is expected in the coming months. 

Continue Reading Provisional text of the political agreement on the reform to the EU Regulatory Framework for Medicinal Products is published

January 2026 saw significant activity as UK and EU authorities advanced major initiatives affecting the use of AI, digital technologies, data governance, and cybersecurity in healthcare and life sciences. Notable developments include EMA’s and FDA joint principles on the use of AI across the medicinal product lifecycle, the European Commission’s call for evidence on the proposed amendments to the Medical Devices Regulation (EU) 2017/745 (MDR) and In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (EU) 2017/746 (IVDR), proposals to strengthen the EU Cybersecurity Act, and important data protection interventions. In parallel, UK and EU regulators continued to focus on the safe deployment of digital tools in healthcare, including new Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) guidance on mental health technologies and ongoing work to refine AI governance. These updates, alongside developments in Intellectual Property (IP) and product liability, signal a rapidly evolving regulatory environment that will help to shape digital innovation and compliance expectations throughout 2026.

Continue Reading Virtual and Digital Health Digest – February 2026

On 19 November 2025, the European Commission published two legislative proposals – the Digital Omnibus on AI Regulation Proposal and the broader Digital Omnibus Regulation Proposal (“Proposals”) – as part of a wider initiative to simplify and streamline the EU’s digital regulatory framework. Together, the Proposals introduce targeted but significant amendments across a broad range of instruments, including the EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689), the GDPR (Regulation (EU) 2016/679), the ePrivacy Directive (2002/58/EC), the NIS2 Directive ((EU) 2022/2555), and the EU Data Act (Regulation (EU) 2023/2854).

Continue Reading EU Digital Omnibus: What the Proposed Reforms Mean for Pharma and MedTech

The Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA) has published revised guidance on social media.

Social media has remained a significant focus for the PMCPA in recent years, with numerous companies found in breach of the ABPI Code (the Code) due to activity on social media by the companies themselves, their employees, or associated third parties. Compliance in this space is particularly challenging given the global reach of social media and its inherently public nature, especially when the promotion of prescription-only medicines (POMs) to the public is prohibited in the UK.

Continue Reading UK PMCPA publishes revised guidance for the use of social media

Today, 16 February 2026, the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) opened an important consultation seeking views on proposed changes to the recognition of CE‑marked medical devices in Great Britain (GB). The initiative forms part of the UK’s ongoing efforts to refine its post‑Brexit regulatory landscape and ensure continued patient access to safe, effective medical technologies. The consultation invites feedback from a broad range of stakeholders, including manufacturers, distributors, clinicians, procurement bodies, trade associations, regulatory specialists, and patient organisations. It follows the UK government’s response in July 2025 to its consultation on routes to market for medical devices and IVDs, which outlined, among other initiatives, details of a future international reliance scheme – see our previous blog post on this for more information.

Continue Reading MHRA Launches Targeted Consultation on Indefinite Recognition of CE‑Marked Medical Devices

The UK Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has proposed to set the repayment percentage on sales of branded “newer” prescription-only medicines to the NHS at 16.5% for 2026, a significant reduction on the current rate of 24.3%. The DHSC published the proposals in a consultation, which is open for comment until 21 April 2026.

The Statutory Scheme applies by default to suppliers of branded prescription-only medicines to the NHS who have not elected to be members of the equivalent voluntary scheme for controlling NHS expenditure on branded medicines, currently the Voluntary Scheme for Branded Medicines Pricing, Access and Growth (VPAG).

Continue Reading UK government sets out 2026 branded medicines Statutory Scheme repayment rate

The Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 (“DUAA”) represents the UK’s first major reform of data protection law since leaving the EU. The Act aims to modernise the UK’s data protection framework by reducing administrative burdens on businesses, supporting innovation and maintaining high standards of data protection while enhancing the UK’s position as a competitive destination for data-driven industries.

As most of the data protection reforms introduced by the DUAA came into effect on 5 February 2026, life sciences companies should consider how the new framework reshapes their data protection compliance. While the DUAA introduces new rules, it also creates opportunities for the sector.

Continue Reading UK’s Data (Use and Access) Act: What Life Sciences Companies Need to Know

Global manufacturers placing medical devices or IVDs on the EU market are facing a pivotal moment. Our latest advisory sets out details on the most significant reforms to the EU framework since the MDR and IVDR took effect, with particular emphasis on what these mean for international companies. For companies headquartered outside the EU, who already face additional hurdles such as appointing an EU Authorised Representative, navigating EU‑specific labelling and language rules, and registering in EUDAMED, the Commission’s proposed changes represent both a long‑awaited easing of systemic pressures and a clear signal to reassess EU market‑entry strategies.

Continue Reading The EU Medical Device Shake‑Up: What International Companies Should Prepare For