Referral C-687/21 (Saturn Electro, 16 Nov 2021)
1. As no automatic legal effects are specified, is the compensation rule
enacted in Article 82 of the General Data Protection Regulation invalid in
the case of non-material damage?
2. Is it necessary, for the purposes of the right to compensation, to
establish the occurrence of non-material damage, to be demonstrated by the
claimant, in addition to the unauthorised disclosure of the protected data to
an unauthorised third party?
3. Does the accidental disclosure of the personal data of the data subject
(name, address, occupation, income, employer) to a third party in a paper
document (printout), as the result of a mistake by employees of the
processing undertaking, suffice in order to establish infringement of the
General Data Protection Regulation?
4. Where the undertaking accidentally discloses, through its employees,
data entered in an automated data processing system to an unauthorised third
party in the form of a printout, does that accidental disclosure to a third party
qualify as unlawful further processing (Article 2(1), Article 5(1)(f),
Article 6(1) and Article 24 of the General Data Protection Regulation)?
5. Is non-material damage within the meaning of Article 82 of the
General Data Protection Regulation incurred even where the third party who
received the document containing the personal data did not read the data
before returning the document containing the information, or does the
discomfort of the person whose personal data were unlawfully disclosed
suffice for the purpose of establishing non-material damage within the
meaning of Article 82 of the General Data Protection Regulation, given that
every unauthorised disclosure of personal data entails the risk, which cannot
be eliminated, that the data might nevertheless have been passed on to any
number of people or even misused?
6. Where accidental disclosure to third parties is preventable through
better supervision of the undertaking’s helpers and/or better data security
arrangements, for example by handling collections separately from contract
documentation (especially financing documentation) under separate
collection notes or by sending the documentation internally to the collection
counter without giving the customer the printed documents and collection
note, how serious should the infringement be considered to be
(Article 32(1)(b) and (2) and Article 4, point 7, of the General Data
Protection Regulation)?
7. Is compensation for non-material damage to be regarded as the award
of a penalty similar to a contract penalty?
Case details on the CJEU website
(external link)
Disclaimer