Article 15 GDPR

← Article 15 - Right of access by the data subject →
Chapter 1: General provisions Article 1: Subject-matter and objectives Article 2: Material scope Article 3: Territorial scope Article 4: Definitions Chapter 2: Principles Article 5: Principles relating to processing of personal data Article 6: Lawfulness of processing Article 7: Conditions for consent Article 8: Conditions applicable to child’s consent in relation to information society services Article 9: Processing of special categories of personal data Article 10: Processing of personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences Article 11: Processing which does not require identification Chapter 3: Rights of the data subject Article 12: Transparent information, communication and modalities for the exercise of the rights of the data subject Article 13: Information to be provided where personal data are collected from the data subject Article 14: Information to be provided where personal data have not been obtained from the data subject Article 15: Right of access by the data subject Article 16: Right to rectification Article 17: Right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’) Article 18: Right to restriction of processing Article 19: Notification obligation regarding rectification or erasure of personal data or restriction of processing Article 20: Right to data portability Article 21: Right to object Article 22: Automated individual decision-making, including profiling Article 23: Restrictions Chapter 4: Controller and processor Article 24: Responsibility of the controller Article 25: Data protection by design and by default Article 26: Joint controllers Article 27: Representatives of controllers or processors not established in the Union Article 28: Processor Article 29: Processing under the authority of the controller or processor Article 30: Records of processing activities Article 31: Cooperation with the supervisory authority Article 32: Security of processing Article 33: Notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority Article 34: Communication of a personal data breach to the data subject Article 35: Data protection impact assessment Article 36: Prior consultation Article 37: Designation of the data protection officer Article 38: Position of the data protection officer Article 39: Tasks of the data protection officer Article 40: Codes of conduct Article 41: Monitoring of approved codes of conduct Article 42: Certification Article 43: Certification bodies Chapter 5: Transfers of personal data Article 44: General principle for transfers Article 45: Transfers on the basis of an adequacy decision Article 46: Transfers subject to appropriate safeguards Article 47: Binding corporate rules Article 48: Transfers or disclosures not authorised by Union law Article 49: Derogations for specific situations Article 50: International cooperation for the protection of personal data Chapter 6: Supervisory authorities Article 51: Supervisory authority Article 52: Independence Article 53: General conditions for the members of the supervisory authority Article 54: Rules on the establishment of the supervisory authority Article 55: Competence Article 56: Competence of the lead supervisory authority Article 57: Tasks Article 58: Powers Article 59: Activity reports Chapter 7: Cooperation and consistency Article 60: Cooperation between the lead supervisory authority and the other supervisory authorities concerned Article 61: Mutual assistance Article 62: Joint operations of supervisory authorities Article 63: Consistency mechanism Article 64: Opinion of the Board Article 65: Dispute resolution by the Board Article 66: Urgency procedure Article 67: Exchange of information Article 68: European Data Protection Board Article 69: Independence Article 70: Tasks of the Board Article 71: Reports Article 72: Procedure Article 73: Chair Article 74: Tasks of the Chair Article 75: Secretariat Article 76: Confidentiality Chapter 8: Remedies, liability and penalties Article 77: Right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority Article 78: Right to an effective judicial remedy against a supervisory authority Article 79: Right to an effective judicial remedy against a controller or processor Article 80: Representation of data subjects Article 81: Suspension of proceedings Article 82: Right to compensation and liability Article 83: General conditions for imposing administrative fines Article 84: Penalties Chapter 9: Specific processing situations Article 85: Processing and freedom of expression and information Article 86: Processing and public access to official documents Article 87: Processing of the national identification number Article 88: Processing in the context of employment Article 89: Safeguards and derogations relating to processing for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research purposes or statistical purposes Article 90: Obligations of secrecy Article 91: Existing data protection rules of churches and religious associations Chapter 10: Delegated and implementing acts Article 92: Exercise of the delegation Article 93: Committee procedure Chapter 11: Final provisions Article 94: Repeal of Directive 95: /46: /EC Article 95: Relationship with Directive 20: 02: /58: /EC Article 96: Relationship with previously concluded Agreements Article 97: Commission reports Article 98: Review of other Union legal acts on data protection Article 99: Entry into force and application

Legal Text

Article 15 - Right of access by the data subject

1. The data subject shall have the right to obtain from the controller confirmation as to whether or not personal data concerning him or her are being processed, and, where that is the case, access to the personal data and the following information:

(a) the purposes of the processing;

(b) the categories of personal data concerned;

(c) the recipients or categories of recipient to whom the personal data have been or will be disclosed, in particular recipients in third countries or international organisations;

(d) where possible, the envisaged period for which the personal data will be stored, or, if not possible, the criteria used to determine that period;

(e) the existence of the right to request from the controller rectification or erasure of personal data or restriction of processing of personal data concerning the data subject or to object to such processing;

(f) the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority;

(g) where the personal data are not collected from the data subject, any available information as to their source

(h) the existence of automated decision-making, including profiling, referred to in Article 22(1) and (4) and, at least in those cases, meaningful information about the logic involved, as well as the significance and the envisaged consequences of such processing for the data subject.

2. Where personal data are transferred to a third country or to an international organisation, the data subject shall have the right to be informed of the appropriate safeguards pursuant to Article 46 relating to the transfer.

3. The controller shall provide a copy of the personal data undergoing processing. For any further copies requested by the data subject, the controller may charge a reasonable fee based on administrative costs. Where the data subject makes the request by electronic means, and unless otherwise requested by the data subject, the information shall be provided in a commonly used electronic form.

4. The right to obtain a copy referred to in paragraph 3 shall not adversely affect the rights and freedoms of others.

Relevant Recitals

Recital 58: Modalities for Transparent Information Provision

The principle of transparency requires that any information addressed to the public or to the data subject be concise, easily accessible and easy to understand, and that clear and plain language and, additionally, where appropriate, visualisation be used. Such information could be provided in electronic form, for example, when addressed to the public, through a website. This is of particular relevance in situations where the proliferation of actors and the technological complexity of practice make it difficult for the data subject to know and understand whether, by whom and for what purpose personal data relating to him or her are being collected, such as in the case of online advertising. Given that children merit specific protection, any information and communication, where processing is addressed to a child, should be in such a clear and plain language that the child can easily understand.

Recital 59: Modalities for Facilitating Data Subject Rights

Modalities should be provided for facilitating the exercise of the data subject's rights under this Regulation, including mechanisms to request and, if applicable, obtain, free of charge, in particular, access to and rectification or erasure of personal data and the exercise of the right to object. The controller should also provide means for requests to be made electronically, especially where personal data are processed by electronic means. The controller should be obliged to respond to requests from the data subject without undue delay and at the latest within one month and to give reasons where the controller does not intend to comply with any such requests.

Recital 63: Modalities and Scope of Right of Access

A data subject should have the right of access to personal data which have been collected concerning him or her, and to exercise that right easily and at reasonable intervals, in order to be aware of, and verify, the lawfulness of the processing. This includes the right for data subjects to have access to data concerning their health, for example the data in their medical records containing information such as diagnoses, examination results, assessments by treating physicians and any treatment or interventions provided. Every data subject should therefore have the right to know and obtain communication in particular with regard to the purposes for which the personal data are processed, where possible the period for which the personal data are processed, the recipients of the personal data, the logic involved in any automatic personal data processing and, at least when based on profiling, the consequences of such processing. Where possible, the controller should be able to provide remote access to a secure system which would provide the data subject with direct access to his or her personal data. That right should not adversely affect the rights or freedoms of others, including trade secrets or intellectual property and in particular the copyright protecting the software. However, the result of those considerations should not be a refusal to provide all information to the data subject. Where the controller processes a large quantity of information concerning the data subject, the controller should be able to request that, before the information is delivered, the data subject specify the information or processing activities to which the request relates.

Recital 64: Identity Verification

The controller should use all reasonable measures to verify the identity of a data subject who requests access, in particular in the context of online services and online identifiers. A controller should not retain personal data for the sole purpose of being able to react to potential requests.

Commentary

The possibility to receive consistent, reliable, complete and updated information regarding processing activities allows individuals to obtain and increase their awareness of any relevant processing operation, exercise practical control over their data, and scrutinise the accuracy and lawfulness of data processing operations. Such information – a prerequisite to exercising data subjects GDPR rights (rectification, erasure, restriction, etc.) – is a key principle of the entire data protection framework and must be provided under Article 15 GDPR. More precisely, the controller is obliged to provide accurate, transparent, intelligible, and easily accessible information about whether or not data is being processed, what the actual processing operations consist of, as well as full access to the data undergoing processing. Hindering the exercise of the right of access amounts to a violation of the GDPR. The right should be both free to exercise and not entail any unnecessary burden.

(1) The Right of Access

Article 15(1) describes the core essence of the right of access. Once the access request is received, the controller must verify whether processing of the data subject's personal data is actually taking place. If this is the case, the controller (i) confirms the existence of the processing, (ii) provides access to the personal data (in other words, a copy of the personal data "undergoing processing" under Article 15(3) GDPR or other relevant method to achieve the purpose), and (iii) informs the data subject about certain elements of the processing (Article 15(1)(a-h) and 15(2) GDPR). Regardless of the specific "segment" of access being referred to (i), (ii), or (iii), it is important to emphasise that the entire process must always comply with the requirements of completeness, clarity, and facilitation set forth in Article 12 of the GDPR.

Right to obtain

The GDPR does not impose any requirement regarding the form of the request by which the data subject or their authorised representative exercises the right of access. The data subject may define the scope of their request and does not need to outline the reasons behind it. Even if they did, the controller does not have the jurisdiction to assess underpinning motives. However, if the request is unclear and a large amount of data is being processed, the controller may ask the data subject to specify what processing activities the request relates to (Recital 63 GDPR). If the data subject nonetheless requests access to all their personal data, the controller has to provide this information, as confirmed by the EDPB and national courts.

From the controller

The addressee of the obligation to provide access is the controller within the meaning of Article 4(7) GDPR, namely the entity which determines the purposes and means of the processing. However, the object of an access request may include processing activities performed by a processor on behalf of the controller. In this case, accountability in addressing an access request stays with the controller.

Under Article 12(6) GDPR, the controller shall take any necessary steps to verify the identity of the data subject, since the disclosure of personal data to a different person could qualify as a data breach. However, the controller shall not use this requirement to hinder the exercise of the right of access. For example, when the data subject sends an access request from the same email as they used when first providing their personal data, there can be no doubt as to their identity. Accordingly, a controller that requires disproportionate information from data subjects to identify them does not facilitate the exercise of such right (Article 12(2) GDPR) and violates the data minimisation principle, as the requested data (e.g. a copy of an ID) would not be strictly necessary in many cases.

Confirmation as to ‘whether’ or not personal data are being processed

The initial step for data subjects when requesting access to their personal data is to determine whether or not the controller processes any data concerning them. The search for personal data should be performed on all the paper and computer records where personal data are being processed, including the controller's back-up systems. If the controller does process data related to the requesting data subject, it confirms the existence of processing operations. The controller should respond even if no personal data are processed.

Case-law: A controller should comply with the same requirements regarding the confirmation of the processing regardless whether it is positive or negative. Therefore, even if the controller is not processing any personal data of the data subject, it shall provide an answer in writing and via the appropriate means.

Access to the personal data

In general terms, "access" refers to the set of actions that a controller takes to show the data subject the data undergoing processing. The data itself, not a description of the processing. Typically, this aspect of the right to access materialises in the form of a "copy" of personal data, as specifically described in Article 15(3) GDPR, to which commentary we refer. However, it should be noted that providing a "copy" of the data is not the only way in which a controller can ensure access. Either way, in accordance with Article 12, the outcome of the access must be accurate, clear, and tailored to the data subject's position.

Example: XXX

Under certain circumstances, the controller may find it suitable to offer alternative methods of data access instead of providing a copy. These temporary access modes may include verbal communication, file inspection, or remote/onsite access without download capabilities. Such methods may be appropriate in situations where the data subject's interests are at stake or if they specifically request it. Onsite access could also serve as an initial step when a large volume of non-digital data is being processed, enabling the data subject to understand which personal data is being processed and make an informed decision regarding which data they want to obtain through a copy.

EDPB: Non-permanent ways of access can be sufficient and adequate in certain situations; for example, it can satisfy the need of the data subjects to verify that the data processed by the controller are correct by giving data subjects a chance to view the original data. A controller is not obliged to provide the information through other ways than providing a copy but should take a reasonable approach when considering such a request. Giving access through other ways than providing a copy does not preclude the data subjects from the right to also have a copy, unless they choose not to.

Following information (Article 15(1)(a) to (h) GDPR)

Under Article 15(1)(a) to (h) GDPR the controller is obliged to provide the data subject certain information about the processing. In accordance with Article 12, this information must be accurate, clear and tailored to the data subject's position. Reference to privacy policy modules can only be done when there is no substantial difference between the content of the privacy notice and the information to be provided under Article 15(1)(a) to (h) GDPR. In particular, the controller ensure that the information is accurate and up-to-date with respect to the data subject's request. If this is not the case, as often occurs, controllers will have to provide tailored information in their response.

Example: XXX

(a) Purposes of the processing

Under Article 15(1)(a), the controller must communicate the individual data processing purposes pursued with regard to a given user. This provision does not contain an obligation to mention the legal basis tied to each single purpose. However, such information should nevertheless be included, as it would otherwise be impossible for the data subject to verify the lawfulness of a certain processing operation.

EDPB: Therefore, in order to facilitate the exercise of data subjects’ rights in line with Art. 12(2) GDPR, the controller is recommended to also inform the data subject as to the applicable legal basis for each processing operation or to indicate where they can find this information. In any event, the principle of transparent processing requires that the information on the legal bases of the processing be made available to the data subject in an accessible way (e.g. in a privacy notice).

(b) Categories of personal data concerned

Article 15(1)(b) requires controllers to disclose the categories of personal data involved in the processing. In accordance with the data minimisation and transparency principles, such categories should be specifically listed and linked to the specific purpose. For example, data subjects have the right to know which categories of data are processed in the context of certain business activities. Thus, an e-commerce website should not process data relating to their political preferences.

(c) Recipients or categories of recipients

Article 15(1)(c) GDPR requires the controller to disclose information about recipients or categories of recipients to whom the personal data have been or will be disclosed. The wording has led to debate on whether controllers have to name each recipient or only categories. Controllers tend to stay generic, repeating the information provided in privacy policies.

This approach is not correct because it clearly contradicts the essential purpose of the right of access: allowing the data subject to "be aware of, and verify, the lawfulness of the processing" (Recital 63). To achieve such goal, the information provided must be as meaningful as possible for data subjects to make their choices, which would be impossible if a data subject does not know who exactly their data have been shared with.

Example: In its privacy policy, a data controller affirms that the user's personal data can be passed on to “commercial partners and travel agencies”. This information, which is in principle acceptable for a privacy policy, is greatly insufficient in the context of an access request. For instance, it does not say anything about the geographical location of these partners, making it impossible to verify the lawfulness of the data transfer under Article 44 GDPR.

This is confirmed by Article 19 GDPR, which requires the controller to “inform the data subject about [the specific] recipients if the data subject requests it”. The EDPB shares theses arguments, as well as the CJEU.

Case-law: The CJEU held that Article 15(1)(c) GDPR obliges the controller to disclose the identity of specific recipients of personal data if the data subject requests it, unless the request is manifestly unfounded or excessive, in which case information about categories of recipients is sufficient.

The discussion around this issue is therefore settled: controllers must disclose the name of the particular recipients if the data subject requests so.

(d) Data retention period

Art. 15(1)(d) GDPR requires the provision of information on the intended length of time for which personal data will be stored, whenever possible. If not possible, the criteria used to determine the period must be provided instead. The information provided by the controller must be specific enough for the data subject to be aware of the duration of storage with regard to their personal data. In case it is not feasible to specify the deletion time, the storage duration and its starting point or triggering event (such as the end of a contract or expiration of a warranty period) should be specified. A mere reference, such as "deletion after the expiry of legal storage periods," is insufficient. The information on data storage periods must be focused on the data subject's specific data. If different deletion periods apply to the personal data of the data subject, the deletion periods should be specified in relation to the corresponding processing operations and data categories.

(e) Existence of rights

The information required under Article 15(1)(e) GDPR (existence of the right to rectification, erasure or restriction) must not be a mere stylistic exercise. Rather, it must be tailored to the specific position of the data subject and refer to the ongoing processing operations.

EDPB: Pursuant to Art. 12(2) GDPR, the response by the controller on those rights shall be individually tailored to the case of the data subject and relate to the processing operations concerned. Information on rights that are not applicable for the data subject in the specific situation should be avoided.

(f) Right to lodge a complaint

Article 15(1)(f) GDPR requires controllers to inform the data subject about the possibility to lodge a complaint with "a supervisory authority". This information does not require any kind of personalisation.

(g) Any available information on the source of the personal data

This provision reflects and strengthens the transparency principle set out in Article 14(2)(f) of the GDPR. This provision requires the data controller to inform the user about the source from which their personal data has been collected. It is possible that, for legitimate (Article 14(5) GDPR) or illegitimate reasons, such information may not be communicated. In this sense, Article 15(1)(g) allows for remedying the information asymmetry by forcing the controller to communicate the sources of their data. Just as with specific information about recipients (see above, Article 15(1)(c) GDPR), a high degree of specificity is required in relation to the sources from which the controller has obtained the data. Indeed, it seems to us that the literal tenor of the provision is even clearer in this respect, as it requires providing the data subject with "any available information".

(h) Information about automated decision-making

This provision uses the same language as Article 13(2)(f) of the GDPR, to which we refer for further commentary. It is worth adding here that, in applying the logic underlying Article 15 GDPR, the controller's response should be as tailored as possible to the data subject's specific case (i.e. the automated decision or profiling he or she was subjected to). Furthermore, and for the same reasons, due to the direct reference to Article 22 GDPR, it must be concluded that, in the case of relevant automated decisions under Article 22(1), the provision also covers explanations of any safeguards provided for in Article 22(3) GDPR. That includes, "at least", details on the type of "human intervention", the means by which the data subject's "point of view" can be expressed and how to "contest the decision".

(2) Right to receive information about the appropriate safeguards

In case the controller transfers data to a third country or international organisation and no adequacy decision is in place under Article 45 GDPR, suitable guarantees under Article 46 must be adopted. The data subject must be informed about these guarantees as per paragraph 2. This provision corresponds to the regulations in Article 13(1)(f) and Article 14(1)(f) GDPR. Where requested, the controller must provide copies of such safeguards or indicate where they have been made available.

(3) Right to receive a copy of the personal data

Article 15(3) GDPR constitutes the final component of the right of access, namely the right to receive a copy of all personal data undergoing processing. Such requirement to provide a copy strengthens the right of access under Article 15(1) GDPR and means that the information on the personal data concerning the person who makes the request is provided to the data subject in a way which allows the data subject to retain all of the information and to come back to it.

Personal data undergoing processing

The scope of the provision reflects the definition of personal data provided for in Article 4(1) GDPR. According to the EDPB, this includes, inter alia, special categories of personal data (Article 9 GDPR); personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences (Article 10 GDPR); data knowingly and actively provided by the data subject (e.g. account data submitted via forms, answers to a questionnaire); observed data or raw data provided by the data subject by virtue of their use of the service or device (e.g. data processed by connected objects, transactional history, activity logs such as access logs, browsing history, search activities, location data, clicking activity, unique aspects of a person’s behaviour such as handwriting, keystrokes, or particular way of walking and speaking); data derived from other data, rather than directly provided by the data subject (e.g. credit score, classification based on common attributes of data subjects; country of residence derived from postcode); data inferred from other data, rather than directly provided by the data subject (e.g. to assign a credit score or comply with anti-money laundering rules, algorithmic results, results of a health assessment or a personalisation or recommendation process); pseudonymised data as opposed to anonymised data. This authoritative interpretation should help to settle the judicial debate that has emerged on the correct scope and interpretation of personal data, which directly affects what is included in the copy under Article 15(3) GDPR. To be included in the copy, the data must be undergoing processing. Accordingly, it is not possible to request personal data that does not already exist and that would have to be expressly generated, such as a detailed medical report.

Copy

The definition of "copy" is a topic of debate in both legal doctrine and jurisprudence. In summary, on one hand, it is argued that a copy is a document, whether analog or digital, created by extracting information from other documents or systems in use (such as email clients, meeting minutes, or data system files related to the data subject). On the other hand, it is claimed that a copy should, where possible, be an exact reproduction of the original document itself (such as an email or meeting minutes). In recent guidelines regarding the right of access, the EDPB does not provide a conclusive answer, although the wording of the text suggests the existence of a non-absolute right to a copy of the original document itself, rather than just an extract.

EDPB: The controller can, although is not necessarily obliged to provide the documents which contain personal data about the data subjects making the request in their original form. [...] This, however, does not mean that the data subject always has the right to obtain a copy of the documents containing the personal data, but an unaltered copy of the personal data being processed in these documents.

Regardless of the manner in which the personal data is provided by the controller, whether through the original documents or a compilation of the data, the information should still adhere to the transparency standards specified in Article 12 of the GDPR. In certain situations, compiling and/or extracting the data in a comprehensible manner may be a means of complying with these standards. On the other hand, in some cases, it may be more effective to provide a copy of the actual document containing the personal data to facilitate better understanding. Therefore, the appropriate form of information provision must be determined on a case-by-case basis.

EDPB: In some cases, the personal data itself sets the requirements in what format the personal data should be provided. For example, when the personal data constitutes handwritten information by the data subject, the data subject may need to be provided with a photocopy of that handwritten information, as the handwriting itself is personal data. That could especially be the case when the handwriting is something that matters to the processing, e.g.scripture analysis. The same applies in general for audio recordings because the voice of the data subject itself is personal data. In some cases, however, access can be given by providing a transcription of the conversation, for example, if agreed upon between the data subject and the controller.

A certain flexibility in the interpretation of the notion of "copy" is also present in the CJEU case law. A copy can be described as a "faithful reproduction or transcription of an original” in opposition to a “purely general description” of data. Therefore, in principle, Article 15(3) covers extracts from documents or even entire documents or extracts from databases. However, due to the teleological interpretation adopted by the court, what a controller is obliged to provide ultimately depends on the principle of effectiveness .

Case Law: The CJEU stated that the right to a copy under Article 15(3) GDPR entails that the data subject must be given a faithful and intelligible reproduction of all their personal data, which is necessary for them to exercise their rights.

Either way, it is crucial that the data subject is given the information in a durable, tangible form (such as text or electronic format) that can be stored and retrieved for future reference. Written information, including electronic forms, is generally preferred as it is more likely to endure over time. In cases where it is appropriate, the copy of personal data may be stored on an electronic storage device such as a CD or USB.

Further copies

The second sentence of Article 15(3) GDPR regulates cases where the data subject requests a new copy of their personal data. In such circumstances, the controller may charge a reasonable fee based on the costs of administration. If the controller decides to do so, it "should indicate the amount of costs it is planning to charge to the data subject in order to give the data subject the possibility to determine whether to maintain or to withdraw the request".

Request by electronic means

The GDPR does not impose any requirements on data subjects regarding the form of the request for access to the personal data. Regardless, under Article 15(3), third sentence, GDPR, if the data subject submits an access request electronically, the format of the "information" should match the form of the request. In such cases, both the information under Article 15(1)(a-h) and the copies under Article 15(3) GDPR must be provided in a common electronic format, unless the data subject specifies a different format, which must then be granted. This also implies that in the case of a paper application, copies must be made available in paper form. Ultimately, the data subject determines the format of the copies.

Commonly used electronic form

If a data subject requests information electronically, the controller must provide the information electronically if possible, unless the data subject specifies otherwise (Article 12(3) GDPR). Article 15(3) GDPR requires that the controller provides the answer to an access request in a commonly used electronic form, unless the data subject requests otherwise. This provision assumes that controllers who can receive electronic requests can also provide electronic responses.

When determining the commonly used electronic form to provide information to a data subject, the controller should not rely solely on its own format but rather make an objective assessment. The assessment should consider whether there are specific formats commonly used in the controller's area of operation or in the given context. If there are no such formats, open formats set in an international standard such as ISO should generally be considered. However, the EDPB does not exclude the possibility of other formats being commonly used. When making this assessment, it is important to consider how easily the data subject can access the information in the provided format. The controller should provide information to the data subject on how to access a file in a specific format, including any programs or software that could be used to make it more accessible. The data subject should not be required to purchase software to access the information.

(4) Limits

The right of access is constrained by Article 15(4) GDPR (rights and freedoms of others) and Article 12(5) GDPR (manifestly unfounded or excessive requests). Furthermore, Union or Member State law may restrict the right of access in accordance with Article 23 GDPR. Derogations regarding the processing of personal data for scientific, historical research, statistical or archiving purposes in the public interest can be based on Articles 89(2) and 89(3) GDPR accordingly, as well as for processing carried out for journalistic purposes and academic artistic or literary expression on Art. 85(2) GDPR.

Rights and Freedoms of Others

Under Article 15(4) GDPR, the right to obtain a copy shall not adversely affect the rights and freedoms of others. For example, such conflicting rights include trade secrets or intellectual property, in particular the copyright protection accorded to software (Recital 63 GDPR). This issue may also be problematic in the case of camera footage showing more than one person. However, as affirmed by the recital, this cannot not be an excuse to deny the right of access. The conflict in the aforementioned example could be resolved by blurring the images of other persons to render them unrecognisable. This measure has for example been recommended by DPAs when the angle of a camera results in the excessive processing of data, contrary to the minimisation principle.

Other Limits

The controller may charge a reasonable fee or refuse to act on the request where requests from a data subject are manifestly unfounded or excessive, in particular because of their repetitive character, in accordance with Article 12(5) GDPR. For example, the District Court of Limburg has ruled that submitting unclear access requests to controllers with the sole purpose of initiating procedures to collect damages from them when their responses to access requests were delayed constitutes an abuse of the right. The controller nevertheless bears the burden of demonstrating the manifestly unfounded or excessive character of the request.

Decisions

→ You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 15 GDPR