CJEU - C-70/10 - Scarlet Extended: Difference between revisions
From GDPRhub
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
|Party_Link_5= | |Party_Link_5= | ||
|Reference_Body=Court of Appeal of Brussels | |Reference_Body=Court of Appeal of Brussels (Belgium) | ||
|Reference_Case_Number_Name=Scarlet Extended SA | |Reference_Case_Number_Name=Scarlet Extended SA | ||
Revision as of 14:35, 21 September 2021
| CJEU - C-70/10 Scarlet Extended | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court: | CJEU |
| Jurisdiction: | European Union |
| Relevant Law: | Article 10 ECHR Article 8 ECHR Directive 2000/31 Directive 2001/29 Directive 2004/48 Directive 95/46 Directive 2002/58 |
| Decided: | 24.11.2011 |
| Parties: | Scarlet Extended SA Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) |
| Case Number/Name: | C-70/10 Scarlet Extended |
| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EU:C:2011:771 |
| Reference from: | Court of Appeal of Brussels (Belgium) Scarlet Extended SA |
| Language: | 24 EU Languages |
| Original Source: | Judgement |
| Initial Contributor: | FA |
The CJEU held that national courts may not order ISPs to preventively, indefinitely and at their own expense install a filtering and blocking system applicable to all electronic communication between customers. This type of system breaches ISPs’ right to conduct business as well as violates individuals' right to privacy, freedom of communication and freedom of information.
English Summary
Facts
In progress - check 22/09
Holding
In progress - check 22/09
Comment
Share your comments here!
Further Resources
Share blogs or news articles here!
