CJEU - C-560/21 - KISA: Difference between revisions

From GDPRhub
(Created page with "{{CJEUdecisionBOX |Case_Number_Name=C-560/21 KISA |ECLI= |Opinion_Link= |Judgement_Link=https://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf?text=&docid=250942&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&m...")
 
Line 47: Line 47:


If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative:
If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative:
2. Does the second sentence of Article 38(3) of the GDPR have a
2. Does the second sentence of Article 38(3) of the GDPR have a
sufficient legal basis, in particular in so far as the provision covers data protection officers who have an employment relationship with the controller?
sufficient legal basis, in particular in so far as the provision covers data protection officers who have an employment relationship with the controller?

Revision as of 10:03, 27 April 2022

CJEU - C-560/21 KISA
Cjeulogo.png
Court: CJEU
Jurisdiction: European Union
Relevant Law: Article 38(3) GDPR
Decided:
Parties: Zweckverband ‘Kommunale Informationsverarbeitung Sachsen’ KISA
Case Number/Name: C-560/21 KISA
European Case Law Identifier:
Reference from: BAG (Germany)
Language: 24 EU Languages
Original Source: Judgement
Initial Contributor: n/a

See Holding for questions referred.

English Summary

Facts

Facts pending decision.

Holding

Questions referred:

1. Is the second sentence of Article 38(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (the General Data Protection Regulation; ‘the GDPR’) to be interpreted as precluding a provision of national law, such as, in the present case, the first sentence of Paragraph 6(4) of the Bundesdatenschutzgesetz (Federal Law on data protection), which makes dismissal of the data protection officer by the controller, who is his or her employer, subject to the conditions set out therein, irrespective of whether such dismissal relates to the performance of his or her tasks?

If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative:

2. Does the second sentence of Article 38(3) of the GDPR have a sufficient legal basis, in particular in so far as the provision covers data protection officers who have an employment relationship with the controller?

Comment

Share your comments here!

Further Resources

Share blogs or news articles here!