CJEU - C‑230/14 - Weltimmo

From GDPRhub
Revision as of 17:59, 24 November 2021 by FA (talk | contribs)
CJEU - C‑230/14 Weltimmo
Court: CJEU
Jurisdiction: European Union
Relevant Law:
Article 28(1) Directive 95/46/EC
Article 28(3) Directive 95/46/EC
Article 4(1)(a) Directive 95/46/EC
Article 28(6) Directive 95/46/EC
Decided: 01.10.2015
Parties: Weltimmo s. r. o.
Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság (Hungarian DPA)
Case Number/Name: C‑230/14 Weltimmo
European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2015:639
Reference from: Supreme Court (Hungary)
Language: 24 EU Languages
Original Source: Judgement
Initial Contributor: Frederick Antonovics

In progress

English Summary


Weltimmo was a company registered in Slovakia that ran a property dealing website concerning Hungarian properties. For that purpose, it processed the personal data of advertisers. The advertisements were free of charge for one month but a fee had to be paid once this time had passed. Many advertisers sent a request by e-mail for the deletion of both their advertisements and their personal data as from that period. However, Weltimmo did not delete those data and charged the interested parties for the price of its services. As the amounts charged were not paid, Weltimmo forwarded the personal data of the advertisers concerned to debt collection agencies.

These advertisers lodged complaints with the Hungarian data protection authority, which fined the company HUF 10 million (approximately €32,000). Weltimmo appealed the fine before the Budapest administrative and labour court, which set aside the DPA's decision on the basis that certain facts were unclear. The company then appealed this decision to the Supreme Court, submitting that there was no need for further clarification of the facts, since, pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 95/46, the Hungarian DPA in this case was not competent and could not apply Hungarian law in respect of a supplier of services established in another Member State. Weltimmo maintained that, under Article 28(6) of Directive 95/46, that authority should have asked the Slovak data protection authority to act in its place.


In progress


Share your comments here!

Further Resources

Share blogs or news articles here!