HDPA (Greece) - 26/2023
| HDPA - 26/26-06-2023 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Authority: | HDPA (Greece) |
| Jurisdiction: | Greece |
| Relevant Law: | Article 15 GDPR Article 2 par. 8 of National Law 3051/2002 Article 24 par. 1 of National Law 2690/1999 |
| Type: | Complaint |
| Outcome: | Rejected |
| Started: | 14.06.2023 |
| Decided: | 14.06.2023 |
| Published: | 26.06.2023 |
| Fine: | n/a |
| Parties: | n/a |
| National Case Number/Name: | 26/26-06-2023 |
| European Case Law Identifier: | n/a |
| Appeal: | n/a |
| Original Language(s): | Greek |
| Original Source: | HDPA (in EL) |
| Initial Contributor: | Anastasia Tsermenidou |
The Greek DPA stated that in order for the applicant to have access to access to specific documents containing personal data, he shall exercise his right of access to a document in an appropriate manner in accordance with Article 15 of the GDPR.
English Summary
Facts
There was a complaint by A against the Director of Primary Education. With the as aforesaid complaint, the complainant states that in the context of a genealogical investigation he is conducting on his surname, he requested by sending an e-mail from the Directorate of Primary Education that he be allowed to search, inter alia, the Course Catalogue and Certificate of Studies Book in search of the entries in it of his surname. The complainant replied to the complainant by stating - inter alia - that she was only able to provide him with numerical data (number of pupils per year) and not personal data. In addition, the complainant requests in his complaint that the Authority order the Directorate of Primary Education to allow him immediate research access to the books of the closed/abolished Primary School's curriculum, as regards the research on the surname entries in them. The Authority, after examining the above complaint, issued a filing act, putting the above complaint on file on the grounds that, on the one hand, there was no violation of the data subject's right and, on the other hand, because it was not within the competence of the Authority. In particular, the Authority considered that his request to the complainant controller (Directorate Primary Education X) did not constitute an exercise of the right of access to personal data concerning him/her under Article 15 of the GDPR, but a request to carry out scientific research. Subsequently, the complainant lodged an objection-request for a review of his case in which he briefly alleges, inter alia, the following: its request to the complainant is not a request to carry out scientific research, but a personal genealogical research, which is far from scientific research and the data in the requested search concern him and constitute his right. The Authority has examined an application for a remedy against an act of filing a complaint. Having regard to Articles 2(2)(a) and (b). 8 of Act No. 3051/2002 and 24 par. 1 of Act No. 2690/1999, as well as the Authority's own case law, the Authority rejected the present application for treatment, as the applicant neither relies on nor submits new substantial evidence in support of its claims, the assessment of which, under the legal conditions, could lead to a different conclusion to access his family's historical past, and he requests a review of the data and requests its reconsideration.
Holding
The Authority has examined an application for a remedy against an act of filing a complaint. Having regard to Articles 2(2)(a) and (b). 8 of Act No. 3051/2002 and 24 par. 1 of Act No. 2690/1999, as well as the Authority's own case law, the Authority rejected the present application for treatment, as the applicant neither relies on nor submits new substantial evidence in support of its claims, the assessment of which, under the legal conditions, could lead to a different conclusion.
Comment
Share your comments here!
Further Resources
Share blogs or news articles here!
English Machine Translation of the Decision
The decision below is a machine translation of the Greek original. Please refer to the Greek original for more details.
Summary The Authority considered a request for remedy against the act of filing a complaint. Taking into account articles 2 par. 8 of Law 3051/2002 and 24 par. 1 of Law 2690/1999, as well as the Authority's own jurisprudence, the Authority rejected the treatment request in question, as the applicant does not invoke either submits material new evidence in support of its claims from the assessment of which a different judgment could, under the legal conditions, result.
