Data protection case law Court of Justice

Accountability

3 pending referrals

Referral C-231/22 (Belgian State, 1 Apr 2022)


Referral C-60/22 (Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 1 Feb 2022)


Referral C-340/21 (Natsionalna agentsia za prihodite, 2 Jun 2021)


2 preliminary rulings

of 27 Oct 2022, C-129/21 (Proximus)

Article 5(2) and Article 24 of Regulation 2016/679must be interpreted as meaning that a national supervisory authority may require that the provider of publicly available telephone directories and directory enquiry services, as controller, take appropriate technical and organisational measures to inform third-party controllers, namely the telephone service operator that has communicated its subscriber’s personal data to that provider and the other providers of publicly available telephone directories and directory enquiry services to which that provider has itself supplied such data, of the withdrawal of the subscriber’s consent.

of 11 Nov 2020, C-61/19 (Orange Romania)

Article 2(h) and Article 7(a) of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data and Article 4(11) and Article 6(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), must be interpreted as meaning that it is for the data controller to demonstrate that the data subject has, by active behaviour, given his or her consent to the processing of his or her personal data and that he or she has obtained, beforehand, information relating to all the circumstances surrounding that processing, in an intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language, allowing that person easily to understand the consequences of that consent, so that it is given with full knowledge of the facts. A contract for the provision of telecommunications services which contains a clause stating that the data subject has been informed of, and has consented to, the collection and storage of a copy of his or her identity document for identification purposes is not such as to demonstrate that that person has validly given his or her consent, as provided for in those provisions, to that collection and storage, where
–   the box referring to that clause has been ticked by the data controller before the contract was signed, or where
–   the terms of that contract are capable of misleading the data subject as to the possibility of concluding the contract in question even if he or she refuses to consent to the processing of his or her data, or where
–   the freedom to choose to object to that collection and storage is unduly affected by that controller, in requiring that the data subject, in order to refuse consent, must complete an additional form setting out that refusal.


Disclaimer