CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

- Colección
- Registrarse

ordenado por

Fecha de creación

61 relaciones, 59 Entidades

Seleccionar párrafo de destino3

● ● ●

Uwazi es desarrollado por
CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law
Colección
Acceder

Información
61relaciones

GC, AF, BH, ED v. National Commission on Informatics and Liberty (CNIL)

Case Law

Consejos de búsqueda

Buscar texto

Type something in the search box to get some results.

Tabla de Contenidos

Sin Tabla de Contenidos

Sin descripción de Tabla de Contenidos

GC, AF, BH, ED v. National Commission on Informatics and Liberty (CNIL)

Case Law

Country

France

Country Location

Latitud: 46.808568018841505

Longitud: 2.799314618110868

Country Location (vinculado Case Law): France

Decision Date: 24 sept 2019

Case Status: Cerrado

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Remanded for Decision in Accordance with Ruling

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Declaratory Relief

Keywords

Data Protection and Retention
Privacy
Right to be Forgotten
Search Engines

Judicial Body: Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)

Court Name: Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union

Case Number: C‑136/17

Case Summary: The Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union held in a Preliminary Ruling that the European Union Directive 95/46, which protects the right to privacy with respect to processing sensitive personal data, applied to search engine operators. Four individuals in France brought complaints before the French Data Protection Authority (CNIL) to de-reference links displayed on Google following searches of their names. This included information about their criminal convictions, judicial enquiries, as well as religious and political views. In 2015 and 2016, the CNIL refused to take up their complaints and the four appealed to France’s Conseil d’État (Council of State) against CNIL’s refusal. The Council of State referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union questions regarding the processing of sensitive personal data and the obligations of search engine operators. The Court of Justice found that the processing of personal data by search engines significantly affected privacy rights of those concerned. Data subjects could request de-referencing of such personal data and when assessing them search engine operators had to strike a balance between privacy rights of data subjects and the rights of Internet users potentially interested in that information.

Case Significance: The judgment expands expression since it gives search engine operators the authority and prerogative to decide which links to de-reference and which links to not. However, private companies are not necessarily the best arbiters of determining whether privacy rights or the public interest should take precedence, as companies are motivated by their own commercial interests and hence cannot be neutral parties. The ruling effectively “placed the burden and responsibility of balancing of users’ fundamental rights on private actors, forcing them to take up the role of private adjudicators in online space.” Yet on the positive side, it upholds a system for notice and take-down allowing search engines to respond to requests, rather than putting them in a situation where they would need to pro-actively monitor and de-index sensitive data independently.

The decision also protects the right of data subjects to ensure that sensitive information about them that is available online is accurate and up-to-date by requiring search engine operators to adjust the list of results in a way that the overall picture it gives the internet user reflects the current status quo. Despite some of the positive aspects of the ruling, requiring search engines to adjust results could render less accurate results and have some unintended consequences.

The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

Related Caselaw

Google Spain SL v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos
Hurbain v. Belgium

Source Name and URL: Global Freedom of Expression

Collection

Columbia

Date Updated: 3 jul 2024

Documentos primarios

Judgment.pdf
English
Descargar Ver

Sin referencias

References are parts of this document related with other documents and entities.

Country1
- Country1
Related Case Law59
- Case Law59
No existe etiqueta1
- Analysis1

Crear Referencia

Seleccionar tipo de relación

Original Law Cited
Related Translation
Related Media Source
Country
Related Law
Related Regulations
Related Secondary Law
Related Amendments
Related Draft Amendments
Related Case Law
Related Analysis

Consejos de búsqueda

Añadir entidades / documentos

Consejos de búsqueda

Notificaciones

Estás al día

La actividad nueva se mostrará aquí.