This contribution departs from a theoretical question relating to the similarities and differences between informed consent as a concept of contract law on the one hand and as a concept of privacy and data protection on the other hand. As a lot of private urban mobility initiatives (e.g. Uber public transportation) focus on tracking and profiling users for the purpose of data analyses that lie at the core of their business models, informed consent plays a fundamental role in the transactions through which this data is acquired. This chapter aims to explore the urban mobility context in order to identify and discuss legal issues linked to the tensions between contract on the one hand and privacy and data protection law on the other. In order to discuss consent from the perspective of contract law, it examines the contract as the transactional regime underpinning the legitimacy and legal validity of an agreement between two parties. What is the role of consent in contract formation? How does it come into being, and how is it recorded? In addition, when does consent need to be informed according to contract law? These questions will be central to Section 2. Section 3 will connect the reflections on contract law to insights from privacy scholarship in order to define and understand the concept of ‘informed consent’ and how this concept relates to the contractual consent explored above, especially in light of the recent ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Planet49 case. Section 4 discusses the main similarities and differences between the two facets of consent and reflects upon whether they (need to) converge or diverge in the context of smart mobility as a policy pursuing local/regional sustainability.
|Title of host publication
|Smart Urban Mobility
|M. Finck, M. Lamping, V. Moscon, H. Richter
|Number of pages
|Published - 1 Oct 2020
|MPI Studies on Intellectual Property and Competition Law,