Previous 1 / 12 Next

JURISPRUDENCIA Roj: STS 2873/2020 - ECLI: ES:TS:2020:2873 Id Cendoj: 28079130032020100221 Órgano: Tribunal Supremo. Sala de lo Contencioso Sede: Madrid Sección: 3 Fecha: 17/09/2020 Nº de Recurso: 1733/2019 Nº de Resolución: 1175/2020 Procedimiento: Recurso de Casación Contencioso-Administrativo (L.O. 7/2015) Ponente: MARIA ISABEL PERELLO DOMENECH Tipo de Resolución: Sentencia Resoluciones del caso: SAN 5045/2018, ATS 7380/2019, STS 2873/2020 TRIBUNALSUPREMO Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo Sección Tercera Sentencia núm. 1.175/2020 Fecha de sentencia: 17/09/2020 Tipo de procedimiento: R. CASACION Número del procedimiento: 1733/2019 Fallo/Acuerdo: Fecha de Votación y Fallo: 12/05/2020 Ponente: Excma. Sra. D.ª María Isabel Perelló Doménech Procedencia: AUD.NACIONAL SALA C/A. SECCION 1 Letrado de la Administración de Justicia: Ilmo. Sr. D. Luis Martín Contreras Transcrito por: BPM Nota: R. CASACION núm.: 1733/2019 Ponente: Excma. Sra. D.ª María Isabel Perelló Doménech Letrado de la Administración de Justicia: Ilmo. Sr. D. Luis Martín Contreras TRIBUNAL SUPREMO Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo Sección Tercera Sentencia núm. 1175/2020 Excmos. Sres. y Excma. Sra. D. Eduardo Espín Templado, presidente D. José Manuel Bandrés Sánchez-Cruzat 1

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Don Segundo v. Google LLC

Case Law

Country

Spain

Country Location

Latitude: 40.17158238163279

Longitude: -3.6606463193890733

Country Location (linked Case Law): Spain

Decision Date: Sep 17, 2020

Case Status: Closed

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Affirmed Lower Court

Keywords

Data Protection and Retention
Filtering and Blocking
Privacy
Right to be Forgotten
Search Engines

Judicial Body: Supreme Court (court of final appeal)

Court Name: Third Section of the Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Tribunal of Spain

Case Number: STS 2873/2020

Case Summary: The Third Section of the Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Tribunal of Spain considered that a citizen’s claims regarding his right to be forgotten had no merit, since he wanted Google to remove from its search engine information that was of public interest. Don Segundo’s company was the subject of several online publications on two different internet platforms which criticized its services in the real estate business. Don Segundo wanted Google to take measures to prevent his name from appearing in the search results. The Tribunal considered that the right to be forgotten must be carefully weighed with the right to freedom of information and expression of internet users. Since the information Segundo wanted to take down was still of public interest to consumers and users, the Court decided in favor of maintaining the information indexed in Google’s search engine.

Case Significance: In this decision, the Supreme Tribunal expands freedom of expression by holding that the right to be forgotten doesn’t apply to information of public interest. The Court also stated that Google can’t be compelled to act as a fact-checker for all the information indexed in the search engine. In this case, a robust protection is dispensed in favor of access to information and freedom of expression in relationship to online publications that include criticism of private actors.

This case did not set a binding or persuasive precedent either within or outside its jurisdiction. The significance of this case is undetermined at this point in time.

Related Caselaw (self)

Google Spain SL v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos

Source URL: Global Freedom of Expression

Collection

Columbia

Date Updated: Jul 3, 2024

Primary Documents

Judgment (in Spanish)
Spanish
Download View

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

Select target paragraph3

Don Segundo v. Google LLC

Primary Documents

Notifications