CE - N° 391000 et al.

From GDPRhub
CE - Right to be forgotten
Conseil D'Etat photo.png
Court: CE (France)
Jurisdiction: France
Relevant Law:

Article 17 GDPR

Decided: 6. 12. 2019
Published: n/a
Parties: n/a
National Case Number: N° 391000

N° 393769

N° 395335

N° 397755

N° 399999

N° 401258

N° 403868

N° 405464

N° 405910

N° 407776

N° 409212

N° 423326

N° 429154

European Case Law Identifier: n/a
Appeal from: CNIL (France)
Language: French
Original Source: CONSEIL D'ETAT (in FR)

The French Council of State (Conseil d' Etat) issued 13 decisions on the right to be forgotten, in the light of the CJEU's judgment in C-136/17 CNIL against Google LLC.

English Summary[edit | edit source]

Facts[edit | edit source]

13 individuals requested the de-referencing of links leading to webpages which contained their personal data from Google LLC. Following Google’s refusal, the individuals filed complaints with the CNIL to request the de-referencing of the links at stake. The CNIL rejected all of the complaints. Thus, each of the complainants challenged the CNIL’s decision before the French Council of State (Conseil d’Etat). From these 13 appeals 18 different legal issues arose.

Holding[edit | edit source]

In several instances the Court found that Google complied with the de-referencing requests prior to the appeals. Nevertheless, the Court clarified the framework in which a search engine must respect the right to be forgotten.

It recalled that the right to be forgotten is not absolute and it always has to be balanced against the right of freedom of information. When implementing this balancing test the sensitivity of personal data should be taken into consideration. Insofar it does not concern sensitive personal data, the de-referencing must take place whenever the information provided with the link does not outweigh the right to information of the public.

The Conseil d’ Etat set guidelines by stating that the balancing assessment should focus on three main elements:

  • The nature of the personal data,
  • the social importance of the data subject and
  • whether the information provided with the link is easily accessible.

Insofar it regards sensitive personal data, the de-referencing must occur whenever the information provided with the link is not strictly necessary for the information of the public. In the latter case a stricter assessment has to be conducted, but it still has to follow the same three main elements.

Comment[edit | edit source]

Share your comment on the decision here!

Further Resources[edit | edit source]

Share blogs or news articles here!

English Machine Translation of the Decision[edit | edit source]

There is no machine translated text. Please refer to the French original decisions for details.