Court of Appeal of Brussels - 2022/AR/556: Difference between revisions

From GDPRhub
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 93: Line 93:
In its [https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=APD/GBA_(Belgium)_-_47/2022 decision 47/2022], the Belgian DPA (DPA) had determined that the Brussels South Charleroi Airport (controller) had violated several GDPR provsions, which reuslted in a fine of €100,000. The controller had monitored passengers' temperature using thermal cameras between June and March 2021. All passengers with a temperature over 38°C were requested to have their temperature measured again by a medical service. Passengers suspected to be infected by COVID-19 after this second check, wer were asked to leave the airport and were not allowed to board their plane.  
In its [https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=APD/GBA_(Belgium)_-_47/2022 decision 47/2022], the Belgian DPA (DPA) had determined that the Brussels South Charleroi Airport (controller) had violated several GDPR provsions, which reuslted in a fine of €100,000. The controller had monitored passengers' temperature using thermal cameras between June and March 2021. All passengers with a temperature over 38°C were requested to have their temperature measured again by a medical service. Passengers suspected to be infected by COVID-19 after this second check, wer were asked to leave the airport and were not allowed to board their plane.  


The DPA held they lacked a lawful ground for processing these special personal data. For more information on this decision, see the original decision and the [https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=APD/GBA_(Belgium)_-_47/2022 GDPRhub summary].
For more information on this decision, see the original decision and the [https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=APD/GBA_(Belgium)_-_47/2022 GDPRhub summary]. Among other violations, the DPA determined that the controller processed health data without a legal basis. The protocol that the controller was using for its legal basis was not legally binding according to the DPA. 
=== Holding ===
=== Holding ===
To be updated
To be updated


== Comment ==
== Comment ==
''Share your comments here!''
Similar temperature checks were performed at Brussels Airport. This was the subject of a separate (Dutch) decision of the DPA ([https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=APD/GBA_(Belgium)_-_48/2022 48/2022)], also issued on 4 April 2022 and appealed at the [https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=APD/GBA_(Belgium)_-_2022/AR/560_%26_2022/AR/564 Market Court (2022/AR/560 & 2022/AR/564)]. Both the [https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=APD/GBA_(Belgium)_-_48/2022 decision of the DPA] and the [https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=APD/GBA_(Belgium)_-_2022/AR/560_%26_2022/AR/564 decision of the Market Court] are summarised on the GDPRhub.


== Further Resources ==
== Further Resources ==

Revision as of 10:49, 18 January 2023

Court of Appeal of Brussels (Belgium) - 2022/AR/556
Courts logo1.png
Court: Court of Appeal of Brussels (Belgium)
Jurisdiction: Belgium
Relevant Law: Article 5(1)(b) GDPR
Article 5(1)(a) GDPR
Article 6(1)(c) GDPR
Article 6(3) GDPR
Article 9(2)(i) GDPR
Article 12(1) GDPR
Article 13(1)(c) GDPR
Article 13(2)(a) GDPR
Article 13(2)(d) GDPR
Article 13(2)(e) GDPR
Article 30(1) GDPR
Article 30(1)(d) GDPR
Article 35(1) GDPR
Article 35(7) GDPR
Decided: 07.12.2022
Published: 09.01.2023
Parties:
National Case Number/Name: 2022/AR/556
European Case Law Identifier:
Appeal from: APD/GBA (Belgium)
47/2022
Appeal to:
Original Language(s): French
Original Source: GBA (in French)
Initial Contributor: n/a

To be updated

English Summary

Facts

In its decision 47/2022, the Belgian DPA (DPA) had determined that the Brussels South Charleroi Airport (controller) had violated several GDPR provsions, which reuslted in a fine of €100,000. The controller had monitored passengers' temperature using thermal cameras between June and March 2021. All passengers with a temperature over 38°C were requested to have their temperature measured again by a medical service. Passengers suspected to be infected by COVID-19 after this second check, wer were asked to leave the airport and were not allowed to board their plane.

For more information on this decision, see the original decision and the GDPRhub summary. Among other violations, the DPA determined that the controller processed health data without a legal basis. The protocol that the controller was using for its legal basis was not legally binding according to the DPA.

Holding

To be updated

Comment

Similar temperature checks were performed at Brussels Airport. This was the subject of a separate (Dutch) decision of the DPA (48/2022), also issued on 4 April 2022 and appealed at the Market Court (2022/AR/560 & 2022/AR/564). Both the decision of the DPA and the decision of the Market Court are summarised on the GDPRhub.

Further Resources

Share blogs or news articles here!

English Machine Translation of the Decision

The decision below is a machine translation of the French original. Please refer to the French original for more details.

Brussels Court of Appeal -2022/AR/556 p. 2





IN REASON OF:


The SOCIÉTÉ ANONYME BRUSSELS SOUTH CHARLEROI AIRPORT (ei-after “CHARLEROI
AIRPORT"), whose registered office is located at rue des Frères Wright 8, 6041 Charleroi, registered with the
Crossroads Bank for Enterprises at number 0444.556.344,


Applicant port,

Having as counsel, Me Frédéric DECHAMPS, Lawyer at the Brussels Bar, whose Iecabine is located
[...] .


AGAINST:

THE DATA PROTECTION AUTHORITY, whose registered office is located at rue de la presse 35, at 1000
Brussels, registered with the Banque Carrefour des Entreprises at number 0694.67 9.950, represented by
Chairman of its Management Committee,


Portie opposite,

Having as counsel My Evrard de Lophem, Grégoire Ryelandt and Clara Delbruyère, lawyers, including
office is located [...]..




Having regard to the pleadings and in particular:

           decision 47/2022 of April 4, 2022 of the Litigation Chamber of the Authority of
           Data Protection (hereafter "the Impugned Decision");


           the motion filed by the court registry on May 3, 2022;



           The timetable for the exchange of submissions recorded by the Court at the introductory hearing of 18
           May 2022;

           the conclusions of CHARLEROI AIRPORT of September 28, 2022;


           the summary conclusions of the DPA of October 26, 2022;


           the records of exhibits filed by the parties;




              r PAGE 01- □0□□ 3026574- □□□ 2-□□ 34-□6- □1- ;i



              L_J