CJEU - C-129/21 - Proximus

From GDPRhub
CJEU - C-129/21 Proximus
Cjeulogo.png
Court: CJEU
Jurisdiction: European Union
Relevant Law: Article 5(2) GDPR
Article 6 GDPR
Article 7 GDPR
Article 17 GDPR
Article 24 GDPR
Article 95 GDPR
Article 12(2) Directive 2002/58/EC
Article 2(f) Directive 2002/58/EC
Decided:
Parties: Proximus NV
Gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit
Case Number/Name: C-129/21 Proximus
European Case Law Identifier:
Reference from: Court of Appeal of Brussels (Belgium)
Language: 24 EU Languages
Original Source: Judgement
Initial Contributor: n/a

See Holding for questions referred.

English Summary[edit | edit source]

Facts[edit | edit source]

Facts pending decision.

Holding[edit | edit source]

Questions referred:

1. Must Article 12(2) of Directive 2002/58, read in conjunction with Article 2(f) thereof and Article 95 of the General Data Protection Regulation be interpreted as permitting a national supervisory authority to require a subscriber’s ‘consent’ within the meaning of the General Data Protection Regulation as the basis for the publication of the subscriber’s personal data in public directories and directory enquiry services, published both by the operator itself and by third-party providers, in the absence of national legislation to the contrary?

2. Must the right to erasure contained in Article 17 of the General Data Protection Regulation be interpreted as precluding a national supervisory authority from categorising a request by a subscriber to be removed from public directories and directory enquiry services as a request for erasure within the meaning of Article 17 of the General Data Protection Regulation?

3. Must Article 24 and Article 5(2) of the General Data Protection Regulation be interpreted as precluding a national supervisory authority from concluding from the obligation of accountability laid down therein that the controller must take appropriate technical and organisational measures to inform third-party controllers, namely, the telephone service provider and other providers of directories and directory enquiry services which have received data from that first controller, of the withdrawal of the data subject’s consent in accordance with Article 6 in conjunction with Article 7 of the General Data Protection Regulation?

4. Must Article 17(2) of the General Data Protection Regulation be interpreted as precluding a national supervisory authority from ordering a provider of public directories and directory enquiry services which has been requested to cease disclosing data relating to an individual to take reasonable steps to inform search engines of that request for erasure?

Comment[edit | edit source]

Share your comments here!

Further Resources[edit | edit source]

Share blogs or news articles here!