11.Structure for Consideration of the Issues Raised

between the DPC and Mr. Schrems, to which FBI was not a party, I was informed that FBI

was not inviting me to decide this point and that it was reserving its rights in relation to it. As

requested by Mr. Schrems and the DPC, I adjourned Mr. Schrems’ proceedings for mention to the date of the delivery of judgment in FBI’s proceedings.

11. Structure for Consideration of the Issues Raised

107. Having reviewed the pleadings, affidavits and submissions (both written and oral), the

issues which I must decide on this application are as follows:-

(1) I must first consider the preliminary issue as to whether the DPC’s decision to

issue the PDD and the procedures which the DPC has decided to adopt in

respect of the inquiry are amendable to judicial review. On the basis that I

conclude that the DPC’s decision to issue the PDD and to adopt the procedures set out in it and communicated in correspondence to FBI are

amenable to judicial review, I must then consider the further issues set out

below (or at least most of them).

(2) Whether the DPC failed to carry out an investigation/inquiry prior to reaching

a decision in breach of the 2018 Act, the GDPR and the judgment of the CJEU

in Schrems II.

(3) Whether the PDD and the procedure to be adopted by the DPC is a departure

from the DPC’s published procedures in breach of FBI’s legitimate expectations.

(4) Whether the DPC has breached FBI’s right to fair procedures in the inquiry by

affording FBI a period of three weeks (21 days) to provide its submissions to

the DPC.

(5) Whether the DPC has breached FBI’s right to fair procedures by reaching a premature judgment on the matters the subject of the inquiry.

(6) Whether the DPC has breached FBI’s right to fair procedures by adopting a procedure in which the Commissioner (Ms. Dixon) is involved in the

investigation and is also the sole decision-maker.

(7) Whether the proposed adoption of a single decision to cover infringement and

corrective measures is ultra vires s. 111 of the 2018 Act.

(8) Whether the DPC was required to await the recommendations/guidance from

the EDPB before deciding to proceed with the own-volition inquiry and/or

whether the DPC failed to take into account the timing of the EDPB

recommendations/guidance as a relevant factor in its decision to proceed with

the inquiry.

(9) Whether in deciding to commence an inquiry with respect to FBI and not other

persons or bodies involved in EU-US data transfers, the DPC unlawfully

discriminated against FBI and/or breached FBI’s right to equality under Irish

and EU law.

(10) Whether the DPC acted disproportionality in commencing the own-volition

inquiry involving FBI while its consideration of Mr. Schrems’ complaint was

still ongoing.

(11) Whether the DPC failed to set out adequate reasons for various decisions

which it has taken in connection with the own-volition inquiry involving FBI,

including its decision to adopt the particular procedure which it decided to

adopt notwithstanding its published procedures for inquiries.

(12) Whether the DPC was in breach of its duty of candour and, if so, what the

consequences of any such breach are.

(13) Whether the proceedings by FBI are an abuse of process as was originally

contended in the DPC’s statement of opposition (and verified by Ms. Dixon’s