CJEU - Opinion of AG Bobek in Case C‑175/20 - SIA ‘SS’

From GDPRhub
Revision as of 13:10, 9 September 2021 by FD (talk | contribs)
CJEU - Opinion of AG Bobek in Case C‑175/20 SIA ‘SS’
Cjeulogo.png
Court: CJEU
Jurisdiction: European Union
Relevant Law: Article 4(1) GDPR
Article 5(1) GDPR
Article 5(2) GDPR
Article 6(1)(c) GDPR
Article 6(3) GDPR
Decided: 02.09.2021
Parties: SIA 'SS'
Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
Case Number/Name: Opinion of AG Bobek in Case C‑175/20 SIA ‘SS’
European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2021:690
Reference from: Administratīvā apgabaltiesa ( Latvia)
Language: 24 EU Languages
Original Source: Judgement
Initial Contributor: n/a

In the opinion of AG Bobek, data such as phone number and car chassis number must be considered as personal data in the sense of Article 4(1) GDPR when relating to individuals selling their cars. AG Bobek was also of the opinion that Article 6(1)(c) and (3) of the GDPR does not preclude national rules from laying down, without any limit in time, an obligation for Internet advertising service providers to communicate certain personal data to a tax authority, as long as there is a clear legal basis in national law for such a type of data transfer and the data requested are suitable and necessary for the tax authority to complete its official tasks.

English Summary

Facts

SIA ‘SS’ (‘the applicant’) is a company specialized in online advertising services. Private individuals may post and advertise various products on the applicant's website (www.ss.com). Advertised products may include vehicles such as second-hand cars or motorbikes.

On 28 August 2018, the director of the Latvian Tax Inspection Office (‘the defendant’) sent to the applicant request for information on the basis of Article 15(6) of the Law on taxes and duties. In that request, the defendant asked the applicant to renew the defendant's access to information, and in particular information on (1) the telephone numbers of advertisers ; (2) the chassis numbers of vehicles featured in advertisements published on the applicant’s website, and (3) information on advertisements published in the ‘Motor Vehicles’ section of the website during the period from 14 July to 31 August 2018.

The applicant was asked to send the information electronically, in a format that would allow the data to be filtered and selected. The applicant was also asked to include the following information in the data file: a link to the advertisement, advertisement text, make of vehicle, model, chassis number, price, vendor’s telephone numbers.

The applicant lodged an administrative complaint challenging the request for information. According to the applicant, the scope of the request for information, which constitutes personal data within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the GDPR, was not justified by the law. The applicant argued in particular that the defendant, in its capacity as controller, did not comply with the principle of proportionality or the principle of minimisation enshrined in Article 5(1) GDPR. The defendant dismissed the applicant's complaint and the dispute escalated before the national courts. In this context, the referring court referred several questions to the CJEU. On 2 September 2021, AG Bobek rendered its opinion in this case.

Dispute

Holding

In progress

Comment

Share your comments here!

Further Resources

Share blogs or news articles here!