03/02/2020
CURIA - Documents
analogy, L'Oréal and Others EU:C:2011:474, paragraphs 62 and 63), in particular their right to privacy,
with respect to the processing of personal data, a right to which the directive accords special importance
as is confirmed in particular by Article 1(1) thereof and recitals 2 and 10 in its preamble (see, to this
effect, Joined Cases C-465/00, C-138/01 and C-139/01 Österreichischer Rundfunk and Others
EU:C:2003:294, paragraph 70; Case C-553/07 Rijkeboer EU:C:2009:293, paragraph 47; and Case
C-473/12 IPI EU:C:2013:715, paragraph 28 and the case-law cited).
59 Since the first of the three conditions listed by the referring court suffices by itself for it to be
concluded that an establishment such as Google Spain satisfies the criterion laid down in Article 4(1)(a)
of Directive 95/46, it is unnecessary to examine the other two conditions.
60 It follows from the foregoing that the answer to Question 1(a) is that Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 95/46
is to be interpreted as meaning that processing of personal data is carried out in the context of the
activities of an establishment of the controller on the territory of a Member State, within the meaning of
that provision, when the operator of a search engine sets up in a Member State a branch or subsidiary
which is intended to promote and sell advertising space offered by that engine and which orientates its
activity towards the inhabitants of that Member State.
Question 1(b) to (d)
61 In view of the answer given to Question 1(a), there is no need to answer Question 1(b) to (d).
Question 2(c) and (d), concerning the extent of the responsibility of the operator of a search engine
under Directive 95/46
62 By Question 2(c) and (d), the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 12(b) and subparagraph
(a) of the first paragraph of Article 14 of Directive 95/46 are to be interpreted as meaning that, in order
to comply with the rights laid down in those provisions, the operator of a search engine is obliged to
remove from the list of results displayed following a search made on the basis of a person’s name links
to web pages, published by third parties and containing information relating to that person, also in a
case where that name or information is not erased beforehand or simultaneously from those web pages,
and even, as the case may be, when its publication in itself on those pages is lawful.
63 Google Spain and Google Inc. submit that, by virtue of the principle of proportionality, any request
seeking the removal of information must be addressed to the publisher of the website concerned
because it is he who takes the responsibility for making the information public, who is in a position to
appraise the lawfulness of that publication and who has available to him the most effective and least
restrictive means of making the information inaccessible. Furthermore, to require the operator of a
search engine to withdraw information published on the internet from its indexes would take
insufficient account of the fundamental rights of publishers of websites, of other internet users and of
that operator itself.
64 According to the Austrian Government, a national supervisory authority may order such an operator to
erase information published by third parties from its filing systems only if the data in question have
been found previously to be unlawful or incorrect or if the data subject has made a successful objection
to the publisher of the website on which that information was published.
65 Mr Costeja González, the Spanish, Italian and Polish Governments and the Commission submit that
the national authority may directly order the operator of a search engine to withdraw from its indexes
and intermediate memory information containing personal data that has been published by third parties,
without having to approach beforehand or simultaneously the publisher of the web page on which that
information appears. Furthermore, according to Mr Costeja González, the Spanish and Italian
Governments and the Commission, the fact that the information has been published lawfully and that it
still appears on the original web page has no effect on the obligations of that operator under Directive
95/46. On the other hand, according to the Polish Government that fact is such as to release the operator
from its obligations.
66 First of all, it should be remembered that, as is apparent from Article 1 and recital 10 in the preamble,
Directive 95/46 seeks to ensure a high level of protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms of
curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document_print.jsf?doclang=EN&text=&pageIndex=0&part=1&mode=DOC&docid=152065&occ=first&dir=&cid=667631
13/19