Referral C-667/21 (Krankenversicherung Nordrhein, 8 Nov 2021)
1. Is Article 9(2)(h) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection
Regulation; ‘the GDPR’) to be interpreted as prohibiting a medical service
of a health insurance fund from processing its employee’s data concerning
health which are a prerequisite for the assessment of that employee’s
working capacity?
2. If the Court answers Question 1 in the negative, with the consequence that
an exception to the prohibition on the processing of data concerning health
laid down in Article 9(1) of the GDPR is possible under Article 9(2)(h) of
the GDPR: in a case such as the present one, are there further data protection
requirements, beyond the conditions set out in Article 9(3) of the GDPR,
that must be complied with, and, if so, which ones?
3. If the Court answers Question 1 in the negative, with the consequence that
an exception to the prohibition on the processing of data concerning health
laid down in Article 9(1) of the GDPR is possible under Article 9(2)(h) of
the GDPR: does the permissibility or lawfulness of the processing of data
concerning health depend on the fulfilment of at least one of the conditions
set out in Article 6(1) of the GDPR?
4. Does Article 82(1) of the GDPR have a specific or general preventive
character, and must that be taken into account in the assessment of the
amount of non-material damage to be compensated at the expense of the
controller or processor on the basis of Article 82(1) of the GDPR?
5. Is the degree of fault on the part of the controller or processor a decisive
factor in the assessment of the amount of non-material damage to be
compensated on the basis of Article 82(1) of the GDPR? In particular, can
non-existent or minor fault on the part of the controller or processor be taken
into account in their favour?
Case details on the CJEU website
(external link)
Disclaimer