Garda (20s) injured after responding to robbery in Blanchardstown
A Garda has been injured after responding to a robbery at Blanchardstown Shopping Centre in Dublin.
Officers responded to reports of a burglary shortly before 4am on Thursday morning.
Advertisement
Two members came across a man with a weapon, understood to be a knife, who became aggressive and threatening.
A Garda in his 20s suffered injuries during the incident - he was taken to Connolly Hospital for treatment.
The weapon was seized along with €1,500 in cash - a man in his 30s was arrested.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
21 minutes ago
- Reuters
Unintended consequences: how recent data protection rulings threaten Europe's digital future
June 26, 2025 - The GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) is clear that data subjects are not entitled to compensation unless they can demonstrate that the processing of their personal data infringes the GDPR and causes them damage (as set forth in Art. 82(1) of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR)). Over the past couple of years, Europe's highest court, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), — starting with its May 2023 decision in RW v. Austrian Post — has repeatedly affirmed that "the mere infringement of a provision of [the GDPR] is insufficient to confer a right to compensation." Rather, to recover compensation, the data subject must demonstrate that they have suffered damages resulting from a GDPR infringement, and such damages go beyond the infringement itself. The CJEU reasoned that allowing compensation for a GDPR infringement without any proof of actual harm "would run counter to the wording of Art. 82(1) GDPR." The Court emphasized that Art. 82(1) GDPR would not separately reference "damage" and "infringement" if "infringement" alone were sufficient for compensation. As the CJEU further clarified in its April 2024 decision in GP v juris GmbH, this remains true regardless of the seriousness of the GDPR infringement. The CJEU has also clarified that data subjects cannot claim damages based on hypothetical risks or unfounded fears. In its December 2023 decision in VB v Natsionalna agentsia za prihotide, the CJEU confirmed that, where a data subject's damages claim is based solely on assertions of fear that their data may be misused, they must demonstrate that such fear is verifiably well-founded. Similarly, in its January 2024 decision in BL v. MediaMarktSaturn, the CJEU held that "a purely hypothetical risk of misuse [of data] by an unauthorised third party cannot give rise to compensation." Despite this clear guidance from the CJEU, recent decisions from Germany's Federal Court of Justice and the European General Court take the view that so-called "loss of control" over one's personal data — in and of itself — can constitute compensable non-material damages in certain circumstances: •In Junghans v. Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd., a case before Germany's Federal Court of Justice, the plaintiff alleged that unauthorised third parties used the Facebook contact importer feature to associate the plaintiff's phone number with their public Facebook profile information (sometimes called "scraping"), which the third parties then published on the internet. In its November 2024 decision, the German Federal Court of Justice held that, in these circumstances, the plaintiff's "loss of control" over their personal data itself — even without any proof of actual harm (like "psychological impairments") — was sufficient to establish non-material damages under Art. 82(1) GDPR. The Court considered EUR 100 to be appropriate compensation for loss of control alone in this scenario but left room for courts to determine the appropriate amount of compensation in individual cases based on factors like the "sensitivity" of the personal data affected, the extent of the loss of control (e.g., whether a limited or unlimited group of recipients have access to the data), the duration of the loss of control, and the possibility of regaining control. •In Bindl v. Commission, the applicant, a German citizen, alleged that he registered for an event on the European Commission's website by signing in using his Facebook account, which caused his personal data (including his IP address) to be transferred to servers in the United States. He alleged that such transfer was performed without "appropriate safeguards," resulting in a "risk of his data being accessed by the US security and intelligence services" and causing him non-material damage consisting of "a loss of control of his data." In its January 2025 decision, the European General Court held that the transfer of the applicant's personal data did not comply with Art. 46 of Regulation 2018/1725 (i.e., the "EUDPR," which applies to EU institutions) and "put the applicant in a position of some uncertainty as regards the processing of his personal data, in particular of his IP address." Without explaining why such alleged "uncertainty" was sufficient to constitute non-material damages, the Court ordered the European Commission to pay the applicant EUR 400 in non-material damages under Art. 65 EUDPR. Both Mr Bindl and the European Commission have appealed the decision to the CJEU. Takeaways: These decisions could have significant impacts in Europe given that: (i) virtually all businesses and organisations must process personal data to operate; (ii) technical GDPR / EUDPR violations (e.g., minor violations of transparency obligations) and unforeseen data security incidents caused by third parties (e.g., data breaches) are inevitable; and (iii) claimants can attempt to frame a "loss of control" over their personal data, for nearly any GDPR / EUDPR violation. Among other impacts, the authors foresee the following: •Strain on court systems. In Germany alone, in large part due to the litigation insurance model, there are already tens of thousands of individual claims alleging GDPR violations. These mass claims place a significant burden on the courts. To the extent the threshold necessary to establish non-material damages under certain scenarios becomes lower, the frequency and volume of mass claims and/or class actions in Germany and across Europe may increase. •Increased legal and financial exposure. An increase in the volume and scope of litigation may result in heightened risks and costs for businesses and government entities that process personal data of European data subjects, including greater litigation defense costs and more damages awards. Businesses and organizations will need to weigh the cost of doing business in a given jurisdiction. •Chilling effect on business and innovation. These potential heightened risks and costs may deter businesses from entering the European market or introducing new technologies and services, and could even cause established businesses to exit the market altogether. Such risks and costs can impact businesses of all sizes but are particularly challenging for small and medium sized businesses. •Cost to consumers. The potential chilling effect on business and innovation could mean fewer or more expensive technologies and services for European consumers, as businesses either choose not to operate in Europe or charge higher prices to cover heightened risks and costs. All eyes are on the CJEU to see how it will address this issue. The CJEU's guidance will be crucial in determining the balance between protecting personal data and maintaining a manageable legal and economic environment for businesses and consumers across Europe. Any views expressed in this publication are strictly those of the authors and should not be attributed in any way to White & Case LLP.
Daily Mail
29 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
BREAKING NEWS Kim Kardashian 'grandpa robber', 69, 'dies a month after he was convicted for spectacular heist'
Kim Kardashian 's 'grandpa robber' has died just a month after he was convicted for his spectacular heist, according to reports. Didier Dubreucq, 69, suffered from lung cancer and had to be hospitalized during the trial for the 2016 armed robbery. He was sentenced to seven years in prison in May this year. The thief, dubbed 'Blue Eyes', died from his illness on Thursday morning, according to the French authorities. The guilty verdict was handed down on May 23, but Dubreucq did not attend it. He always denied being involved in the heist.
The Guardian
36 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Tennis chiefs lobby gambling firms to close accounts of punters abusing female players
Tennis authorities are lobbying gambling firms to close the betting accounts of punters found to have sent abusive messages to female players, with one American gaming company this week already warning its customers they will do so. A report from the Women's Tennis Association [WTA] and International Tennis Federation [ITF] published last week revealed that 458 players were direct targets of abuse last year, with the British No 2, Katie Boulter, telling the BBC she has been sent death threats and explicit pictures by online trolls. The report, produced using an AI-led detection system developed by the Signify Group, found that 40% of the social media abuse came from frustrated gamblers, a figure that rose to 77% for direct abuse towards players' personal accounts. More than 8,000 posts sent from 4,200 accounts were identified as abusive, with 26% of the offensive messages directed at five female players. Fifteen of the worst offenders have been reported to the police and other law enforcement agencies, while they have also been banned from buying tickets for grand slam tournaments and for ATP and WTA tour events, but there is frustration in tennis at betting companies' apparent reluctance to take action. The Guardian has learned that talks between the WTA, ITF and gambling companies have intensified since the report was published last week however, with some operators indicating a willingness to suspend accounts held by social media abusers. In addition to betting bans, the authorities also want gambling companies to fund industry-wide educational campaigns about online hate. FanDuel, a US-based gambling company, is understood to have altered its terms and conditions earlier this week, giving them the right to suspend customers who harass athletes, as well as broadening the definition of harassment. In an email sent to its database of users on 24 June FanDuel drew customers' attention to a new clause in its rules, which states: 'We may, in our sole discretion, suspend or terminate your Account and/or exclude you from our services if we determine that you pose a threat to the safety of participants in a sporting event, or discover that you engaged in the harassment of a sports official, coach or any participant in a sporting event.' FanDuel is the WTA's official gaming partner in the United States. Under the terms of that deal the WTA has granted FanDuel use of its official scoring data, giving it a potential timing advantage over competitors, while the gaming company also has the rights to use video highlights on its digital platforms. The Gambling Commission is also understood to be involved in the discussions on getting more betting companies to ban abusers. One proposal being considered is for the commission's self-exclusion database, a tool designed to ensure operators are not targeting problem gamblers, to be used to list punters who have sent abusive messages to players. A spokesperson for the WTA and ITF said: 'The report has brought about a constructive conversation with the betting industry. We will continue to push for the industry to do more as part of a collective effort to rid tennis of betting-related abuse. We hope the gambling industry responds constructively to our call for more action on their part.' Boulter's revelations last week caused shock and dismay throughout tennis. One message sent to the 28-year-old during the French Open, read: 'Hope you get cancer'. Another told her: 'Go to hell. I lost money my mother sent me.' While a third instructed her to buy 'candles and a coffin for your entire family' and threatened to damage her 'grandmother's grave if she's not dead by tomorrow'. In an interview with the BBC earlier this week the two-times Wimbledon finalist Ons Jabeur called on the betting companies to ban abusers from their platforms for life. 'I feel like we've been talking about this for a long time, but not a lot changes,' she said. 'The big problem is the betting. The betting companies need to vet these people and look at their social media. If they attack players on social media they should be banned from betting for their whole life.'
