12/10/2019 CURIA - Documents categories mentioned in Article 8(1) and (5) of the directive may be collected and processed, must the provisions of Directive 95/46 be interpreted as allowing the operator of a search engine, on that ground, to refuse a request for de-referencing? (3) If Question 1 should be answered in the negative: [(a)] Which specific requirements of Directive 95/46 must be met by the operator of a search engine, in view of its responsibilities, powers and capabilities? [(b)] When the operator establishes that the web pages at the end of the links subject to the request for de-referencing comprise data whose publication on those pages is unlawful, must the provisions of Directive 95/46 be interpreted as: – requiring the operator of a search engine to remove those links from the list of results displayed following a search made on the basis of the name of the person making the request; or – meaning only that it is to take that factor into consideration in assessing the merits of the request for de-referencing, or – meaning that this factor has no bearing on the assessment it is to make? Furthermore, if that factor is not irrelevant, how is the lawfulness of the publication on web pages of the data at issue which stem from processing falling outside the territorial scope of Directive 95/46 and, accordingly, of the national laws implementing it to be assessed? (4) Irrespective of the answer to be given to Question 1: [(a)] [(b)] whether or not publication of the personal data on the web page at the end of the link at issue is lawful, must the provisions of Directive 95/46 be interpreted as: – requiring the operator of a search engine, when the person making the request establishes that the data in question have become incomplete or inaccurate, or are no longer up to date, to grant the corresponding request for de-referencing; – more specifically, requiring the operator of a search engine, when the person making the request shows that, having regard to the conduct of the legal proceedings, the information relating to an earlier stage of those proceedings is no longer consistent with the current reality of his situation, to de-reference the links to web pages comprising such information? Must Article 8(5) of Directive 95/46 be interpreted as meaning that information relating to the investigation of an individual or reporting a trial and the resulting conviction and sentencing constitutes data relating to offences and to criminal convictions? More generally, does a web page comprising data referring to the convictions of or legal proceedings involving a natural person fall within the ambit of those provisions?’ Consideration of the questions referred 32 The questions referred concern the interpretation of Directive 95/46, which was applicable at the time when the request for a preliminary ruling was submitted. That directive was repealed with effect from 25 May 2018, from which date Regulation 2016/679 applies. 33 The Court will consider the questions referred from the point of view of Directive 95/46, while also taking Regulation 2016/679 into account in its analysis of them, in order to ensure that its answers will in any event be of use to the referring court. Question 1 curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document_print.jsf?docid=218106&text=&dir=&doclang=EN&part=1&occ=first&mode=DOC&pageIndex=0&cid=2571804 10/19