CJEU - C-434/16 - Nowak
| CJEU - C-434/16 Peter Nowak | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court: | CJEU |
| Jurisdiction: | European Union |
| Relevant Law: | Article 2(a) Directive 95/46/EC |
| Decided: | 20.12.2017 |
| Parties: | Peter Nowak Data Protection Commissioner |
| Case Number/Name: | C-434/16 Peter Nowak |
| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EU:C:2017:994 |
| Reference from: | |
| Language: | 24 EU Languages |
| Original Source: | Judgement |
| Initial Contributor: | Frederick Antonovics |
The CJEU held that written answers submitted by a candidate at a professional examination and any comments made by an examiner with respect to those answers constitute personal data.
English Summary
Facts
The claimant, Peter Nowak, was a trainee accountant who failed one open book examination for the fourth time. He initially tried challenging the result of that examination, but his claim was rejected. Shortly after, he made an access request to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ireland ('CAI') seeking all the personal data relating to him that it held. In response, the CAI sent him a number of documents, but refused to send him his exam script on the ground that it did not contain personal data within the meaning of the 1995 Data Protection Directive. He then contacted the DPC to challenge the reason given for the refusal to disclose his examination script. It replied to him and stated that "exam scripts do not generally fall to be considered [for data protection purposes] … because this material would not generally constitute personal data". He did not accept this decision and after more exchanges submitted a formal complaint. The DPC informed him it could not identify a contravention of data protection legislation and consequently would not investigate. Thus, he brought an action against that decision in court. The Circuit Court, High Court and Court of Appeal all dismissed his claims. However, the Supreme Court allowed an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, and held that the action brought by Mr Nowak against the decision of the Data Protection Commissioner was admissible. It was nonetheless uncertain whether an examination script can constitute personal data within the meaning of Directive 95/46, and referred these 2 questions to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling:
(1) Is information recorded in/as answers given by a candidate during a professional examination capable of being personal data, within the meaning of Directive 95/46?
(2) If the answer to Question 1 is that all or some of such information may be personal data within the meaning of the Directive, what factors are relevant in determining whether in any given case such script is personal data, and what weight should be given to such factors?
Dispute
Holding
In progress - check 22/09
Comment
Share your comments here!
Further Resources
Share blogs or news articles here!
