Article 16 GDPR
Legal Text
The data subject shall have the right to obtain from the controller without undue delay the rectification of inaccurate personal data concerning him or her. Taking into account the purposes of the processing, the data subject shall have the right to have incomplete personal data completed, including by means of providing a supplementary statement.
Relevant Recitals
Commentary
Article 16 GDPR provides the data subjects the right to rectify and complete their personal data that are being processed by a controller. This right is another expression of the control that the GDPR gives data subjects over their personal data, as remarked by Recital 7 GDPR.
The right to rectification, along with the rights to erasure, restriction, and object, can be considered a second stage of the exercise of rights, in which control of personal data is effectively exerted. The first stage would be the right to information and access, that would allow the data subject to have the necessary information about their personal data and how they are being processed in order to exercise the control over them.[1]
Article 16 GDPR plays a very important role in the accuracy principle, since it allows data subjects to ensure that their personal data that are being processed by a controller are accurate. Accuracy is reflected in two ways: firstly, accuracy with regards to the exactitude of the data, meaning that the data should not be false, imprecise or incorrect. Secondly, with regards to the completion of the personal data, the data shall be complete, since incomplete data may be misleading in certain contexts or for certain purposes.
Exercise of the Right
Pursuant to Article 12(2) GDPR, the controller shall facilitate the data subject the exercise of the right. This may be done, partially, by providing the possibility of making a rectification request via electronic means, as recommended by Article 15(3) GDPR and Recital 64 GDPR when dealing with access requests.
In accordance with Article 12(3) GDPR, the controller has to answer the rectification request "without undue delay and in any event within one month of receipt of the request". This deadline may be extended two months where necessary, taking into account the complexity and number of the requests. Any extension of the deadline must be communicated to the data subject, along for the reasons for it, according to Paragraph 4 of the same Article.
The right to rectification is, as other rights, not subject to a justification. The data subject does not have to have a reason for exercising it. It is neither, for example, subject to the existence of damage.[2]
In principle, only personal data which accuracy can be contested may be rectified. Therefore, personal data that is in some way subjective might not be rectifiable.[3] This is however debatable. For example, the Litigation Chamber of the Belgian DPA has solved a situation in which they were not in a position to contest the accuracy of the data, since the contested data was a subjective opinion on the data subject, by allowing the data subject to add a statement to the file to the contrary of it, similarly to the right to have incomplete personal data completed by means of providing a supplementary statement.[4]
Additionally, and in accordance with the District Court of Midden-Nederland, the rectification has to be complete. It is not sufficient to issue a report stating the inaccuracies and the corrected data, but the data themselves must be directly corrected in the system in which they are stored, in order to ensure full accuracy.[5]
The right to rectification cannot be used as a means to correct data subjects’ exams answers, since according to the CJEU the assessment of whether personal data is accurate and complete must be made in the light of the purpose for which that data was collected [Reference?]. In such a case, the purpose is to be able to evaluate the level of knowledge and competence of that candidate at the time of the examination. That level is revealed precisely by any errors in those answers. Consequently, such errors do not represent inaccuracy.
This right could be used, however, to examine whether scripts were mixed up in such a way that the answers of another candidate were ascribed to the candidate concerned, or whether some of the cover sheets containing the answers of that candidate are lost.[6]
The fact that the accuracy of the data is related to the purposes for which it is processed is also related to the right to complete personal data, since the purpose of the processing may entail that data that are not factually incorrect may be misleading because of the lack of additional data. This may also mean, however, that the right to rectification may not always oblige a controller to rectify personal data when the inaccuracy is not relevant for the purposes of the processing. For example, the Norwegian Privacy Appeals Board has decided in a case that a controller was not obliged to rectify a single letter of a name since it does not entail danger of mis-identification and is related to differences between countries in spelling names, especially given the burden that it will impose on the controller to modify it in all their records.[7]
The right to rectification is also applicable to data collected before the entry into force of the GDPR, since the storage of such data means that they are still being processed.[8]
Relation to Article 18 GDPR
Article 18 GDPR contains a provision that allows the data processing to be restricted when the accuracy of the data is contested. Therefore, along with a rectification request, the data subject may exercise also their right to restrict the processing during the time while the rectification request is being carried out. For further information, please refer to Article 18 GDPR.
Relation to Article 19 GDPR
Article 19 GDPR contains an obligation for the controller to notify the data subject that the rectification of their data has been carried out, in order to ensure that the data subject is informed about the correct exercise of their right to rectification. For further information, please refer to Article 19 GDPR.
Decisions
→ You can find all related decisions in Category:Article 16 GDPR
References
- ↑ Kamann / Braun, in Ehmann, Selmayr, Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 16 GDPR, margin number 6 (Beck 2018, 2nd ed.) (accessed 17 August 2021).
- ↑ Kamann / Braun, in Ehmann, Selmayr, Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 16 GDPR, margin number 18 (Beck 2018, 2nd ed.) (accessed 17 August 2021).
- ↑ Kamann / Braun, in Ehmann, Selmayr, Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, Article 16 GDPR, margin numbers 19-21 (Beck 2018, 2nd ed.) (accessed 17 August 2021).
- ↑ Gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit, 4 June 2021, 66/2021 (available here https://www.autoriteprotectiondonnees.be/publications/decision-quant-au-fond-n-66-2021.pdf).
- ↑ Rechtbank Midden-Nederland, 29 May 2020, AWB - 19 _ 1687 (available here https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2020:2226&showbutton=true&keyword=AVG).
- ↑ CJEU, 20 December 2017, Nowak, C‑434/16, margin numbers 52-54 (available here https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=198059&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=6547096).
- ↑ Personvernrådet, 10 November 2020, 20/01868 (PVN-2020-15) (available here https://pvn.no/pvn-2020-15).
- ↑ VGH Baden-Württemberg, 3 March 2020, 1 S 397/19 (available here http://lrbw.juris.de/cgi-bin/laender_rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bw&nr=30900).