Previous 1 / 7 Next

03/02/2020 Details of 2016 (Kyo) 45 | Judgments of the Supreme Court move to the right menu move to the main contents Supreme Court of Japan Jump menu Sitemap About this site Privacy Policy JAPANESE（⽇本語） Home Search for Search ⽂字サイズ調整 Jump menu About the Supreme Court Judicial System in Japan Publications Judgments of the Supreme Court The Legal Training and Research Institute of Japan The Training and Research Institute for Court Ofﬁcials Supreme Court Library Links Home > Supreme Court of Japan 2016 (Kyo) 45 →Back Date of the judgment (decision) 2017.01.31 Case Number 2016 (Kyo) 45 Reporter Minshu Vol.71, No.1 Title Decision concerning a case in which a person can demand a search service provider to delete the URLs of websites on which articles or the like containing facts related to the www.courts.go.jp/app/hanrei_en/detail?id=1511 1/7

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Plaintiff X v. Google

Case Law

Country

Japan

Country Location

Latitude: 36.70290703116753

Longitude: 139.16587250319287

Country Location (linked Case Law): Japan

Decision Date: 31 de jan. de 2017

Case Status: Closed

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Affirmed Lower Court
Motion Denied

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Judgment in Favor of Defendant

Keywords

Data Protection and Retention
Privacy
Right to be Forgotten
Search Engines

Judicial Body: Supreme Court (court of final appeal)

Case Number: 2016 (Kyo) 45

Case Summary: The Supreme Court of Japan recognized that, in certain circumstances, a person could require that a search engine operator de-index URLs and other information concerning him/her from search results. The case concerned a man who had been fined in November 2011 on charges relating to paying for child prostitution. This information was reported on several websites at the time and, in 2014, the man requested that Google de-index information concerning his fine from search results. Google did not grant the request. Although a person had the right to have information de-indexed in certain circumstances, the Supreme Court of Japan held that the individual in this case could not oblige Google to do so because of the public interest in the availability of information pertaining to child prostitution, and the narrow dissemination of the information in question.

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

Related Caselaw (self)

Plaintiff X v. Google

Source Name and URL: Columbia Global Freedom of Expression

Primary Documents

Plaintiff X v. Google.pdf
English
Download View

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

Select target paragraph3

Plaintiff X v. Google

Primary Documents

Notifications