search

… By the request for a preliminary ruling which is the subject of this Opinion, the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice, Germany) referred two questions to the Court of Justice on the interpretation of Article 17(3)(a) of (EU) / of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation …

… In light of all the foregoing considerations, I suggest that the Court answer the questions referred by the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice, Germany) as follows: (1) Article 17(3) of (EU) / of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) should be interpreted as …

… / should be interpreted as meaning that, within the context of the weighing-up of conflicting rights and interests arising from Articles 7, 8, 11 and 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, in connection with a request for de-referencing made to the operator of a search engine seeking to obtain the removal, from the results of an image search carried out on the basis of a natural person’s name, of photographs displayed in the form of thumbnails depicting that person, account should not be …

… Where that processing for a purpose other than that for which the data have been collected is not based on the data subject’s consent or on a legislative act of the European Union or of a Member State falling within the scope of Article 23(1) of /, its compatibility must be established in the light of, inter alia, the criteria set out in Article 6(4) of that regulation. (2) Article 5(1)(e) of / must be interpreted as meaning that the principle referred to therein …

… OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL PIKAMÄE delivered on 31 March 2022 (1) Case C-77/21 Digi Távközlési és Szolgáltató Kft. v Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Budapest High Court, Hungary)) (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data - (EU) / - Article 5(1)(b) and (e) - Principle of purpose limitation - Principle of storage limitation …

… This is one of the questions raised by the present case which will enable the Court to add to its growing body of case-law on (EU) /, (2) with regard, more specifically, to the principles of purpose limitation and storage limitation set out in Article 5(1)(b) and (e) of that regulation. I. Legal framework 3. Articles 4 to 6, 13 and 32 of the GDPR are relevant to the present case. II. The dispute in the main proceedings and the questions referred for a preliminary ruling 4. …

… / provides as follows: ‘1. …

… Article 6 of that law entrusts the AP with the task of supervising compliance with / in the Netherlands. …

… /, to which, in this case, X and Z had not consented. …

… Consequently, the relevant provisions of Directive 95/46 and / did not apply outside the EU. The Commission replies by stating that the Google judgment concerned the possible extraterritorial application of EU law. However, in the present case, as it explains, the Commission is not trying to apply the EU legislation to a third country. The case only concerns the application of Regulation No 1151/2012 in the EU itself. …

… To uphold its argument that the EU legislature was obliged to mention explicitly exports to third countries to bring it under the scope of Regulation No 1151/2012, the Kingdom of Denmark also relies on the judgment of 24 September 2019, Google (Territorial scope of de-referencing). (37) That case concerned the territorial scope of the right to de-referencing and the potential extraterritorial effects of Directive 95/46 (38) and its successor, /. (39) The Court found that it was …

… Emphasis added. 36 C-491/01, EU:C:2002:741 (‘the BAT judgment’), paragraphs 203 to 217. 37 C-507/17, EU:C:2019:772 (‘the Google judgment’), paragraphs 53 to 65. 38 Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (OJ 1995 L 281, p. 31). 39 (EU) / of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of …

… OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL PITRUZZELLA delivered on 27 January 2022 (1) Case C-817/19 Ligue des droits humains v Conseil des ministres (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour constitutionnelle (Constitutional Court, Belgium)) (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Protection of personal data - Processing of passenger name record (PNR) data - (EU) / - Scope - Directive (EU) 2016/681 - Validity - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Articles 7, 8 and Article …

… By this request for a preliminary ruling, the Cour constitutionnelle (Constitutional Court, Belgium) puts before the Court of Justice a series of 10 questions concerning the interpretation of (EU) / of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation; ‘the GDPR’) (2) and concerning …

… In this context, the Court is also called upon to express a position on the relationship between this public access regime and various provisions of (EU) /. (4) I. Legal framework A. European Union law 1. Directives 2015/849 and 2018/843 6. …

… (EU) / - Article 5(1)(a) to (c) and (f) - Exemptions from access to the register of beneficial ownership - Conditions - Concepts of ‘exceptional circumstances’, ‘risk’ and ‘disproportionate risk’ - Proof) 1. …

… (EU) / of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) are to be interpreted as not precluding a register which is in part accessible to the public, without any requirement to demonstrate a legitimate interest and without any limitation as to the location of the public. …

… (EU) / on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (“General Data Protection Regulation” – “GDPR”) applies to “natural persons”, and does not cover the processing of personal data which concerns legal persons (recital 14). …

… Apart from certain provisions of primary law, namely Articles 7, 8 and Article 51(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’), also relevant in the present case are Articles 3 and 6 to 8 of Directive 95/46/EC (3) and Articles 2, 5, 6 and 9 of (EU) /. (4) B. Lithuanian law 4. The Lietuvos Respublikos viešųjų ir privačių interesų derinimo įstatymas Nr. VIII-371 (Law No. …

… In the light of the foregoing considerations, I propose that the Court answer the Vilniaus apygardos administracinis teismas (Regional Administrative Court, Vilnius, Lithuania) as follows: (1) Articles 6 and 7 of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data and Articles 5 and 6 of (EU) / of the European Parliament and of the …

… The Court has held that an interpretation of Article 8(1) and (5) of Directive 95/46 or Article 9(1) and Article 10 of / that excluded a priori and generally the activity of a search engine from the specific requirements laid down by those provisions for processing relating to the special categories of data referred to there would run counter to the purpose of those provisions, namely to ensure ‘enhanced protection’ as regards such processing, which, because of the particular sensitivity …

… The particular characteristics of / 50. …

… In so far as such standing to bring proceedings had been deemed by the Court to be compatible with Directive 95/46/EC, (3) it will be for the Court (4) to say whether / has altered the legal position on that point. II. Legal framework A. / 5. Article 80 of /, entitled ‘Representation of data subjects’, is worded as follows: (5) ‘1. …

… /. 32 See, in particular, Article 6(2) and (3), the second subparagraph of Article 8(1) and Articles 85 to 89 of /. 33 See, on that topic, Mišćenić, E., and Hoffmann, A. …

… (EU) / of the European Parliament and of the European Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (the General Data Protection Regulation – hereinafter “the GDPR”), published in OJ 2016 L 119/1, entered into force on 24 May 2016 and repealed Directive 95/46/EC with effect from 25 May 2018. …

… The CJEU ruled that in the event that a search engine operator granted a request for de-referencing (pursuant to Article 12(b) and subparagraph (a) of the first paragraph of Article 14 of Directive 95/46/EC and of Article 17(1) of (EU) / of the European Parliament and of the European Council), that operator would not be required to carry out that de-referencing on all versions of its search engine, but only on the versions of that search engine corresponding to all the European …