Garante per la protezione dei dati personali (Italy) - 10095553

Garante per la protezione dei dati personali - 10095553
Authority:	Garante per la protezione dei dati personali (Italy)
Jurisdiction:	Italy
Relevant Law:	Article 5(1)(d) GDPR
Type:	Complaint
Outcome:	Upheld
Started:
Decided:	13.11.2025
Published:
Fine:	n/a
Parties:	n/a
National Case Number/Name:	10095553
European Case Law Identifier:	n/a
Appeal:	Unknown
Original Language(s):	Italian
Original Source:	Garante (in IT)
Initial Contributor:	cwa

The DPA ordered Google to remove search results showing outdated and inaccurate information about a criminal proceeding against the data subject.

English Summary

Facts

A data subject requested the delisting by Google LLC, the controller, of certain web addresses which referenced him.

The web addresses consisted of reports about a historical criminal court case in which the data subject was acquitted. The data subject claimed that the listing of these web addresses caused damage to their personal and professional reputation, and in light of the time elapsed since the trial and the outcome of acquittal, they should be delisted.

Although agreeing to delist some of the web addresses complained about, Google refused to delist others, claiming that some of the web addresses relate partly to an entirely different matter, and as such, should be considered in assessing the requirement of the passage of time.

The data subject filed a complaint with the DPA.

Holding

The DPA considered that in addition to the element of the passage of time, the other conditions for the establishment of the right to be forgotten, as outlined in the EDPB Guidelines No. 5/2019 on the criteria of the Right to be Forgotten in the search engines cases under the GDPR, should be considered.

The DPA found nine web addresses to be problematic.

In respect of four of these web addresses, the DPA found that they contained outdated information about how the criminal case ended. In respect of another web address, the DPA found that the details about the data subject’s acquittal was not prominently displayed. In respect of two further web addresses, the DPA found that the reports misrepresented the circumstances of the criminal case and that the favourable outcome of the criminal trial was not mentioned. In respect of a further web address, the DPA held that an independent public interest did not exist to associate it with the name of the data subject. In respect of the final web address, the DPA held that the report did not mention the reason why the data subject was acquitted, i.e. that they had nothing to do with the crime.

The DPA, referencing both the GDPR and the EDPB Guidelines No. 5/2019 on the criteria of the Right to be Forgotten in the search engines cases under the GDPR, held that the outdated and incomplete news depicted in the reports available through the web addresses, violated the principles of accuracy in Article 5(1)(d) GDPR and generated “an inaccurate, inadequate or misleading impression with respect to the data subject”.

The DPA thus found that the complaint was well-founded and ordered the removal of the web addresses as search results within 20 days.

Comment

Share your comments here!

Further Resources

Share blogs or news articles here!

English Machine Translation of the Decision

The decision below is a machine translation of the Italian original. Please refer to the Italian original for more details.

[web doc. no. 10095553]

Provision of 13 November 2024

Register of provisions
no. 756 of 13 November 2024

THE GUARANTOR FOR THE PROTECTION OF PERSONAL DATA

IN today's meeting, attended by Prof. Pasquale Stanzione, President, Prof. Ginevra Cerrina Feroni, Vice President, Dr. Agostino Ghiglia and Attorney Guido Scorza, members, and Councillor Fabio Mattei, Secretary General;

HAVING SEEN Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 (hereinafter, “Regulation”);

HAVING SEEN the Personal Data Protection Code, containing provisions for the adaptation of national legislation to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (Legislative Decree 30 June 2003, no. 196, as amended by Legislative Decree 10 August 2018, no. 101, hereinafter the “Code”);

HAVING SEEN the complaint submitted to the Guarantor, pursuant to art. 77 of the Regulation, and regularized on 7 December 2023, with which XX requested that Google LLC be ordered to remove from the search results found in association with its name some URLs referring to a legal case that ended against it with the pronouncement of an acquittal sentence pronounced in XX by XX;

WHEREAS the interested party has, in particular, complained of the damage suffered to his personal and professional reputation by the continued availability of the contested contents online, invoking the recognition of the right to be forgotten in light of the time elapsed since the facts and the favorable outcome of the judgment;

SEEN the note of 7 December 2023 with which the Authority asked the data controller to provide his observations in relation to what was represented in the introductory act of the proceeding and to communicate his possible intention to comply with the complainant's requests;

SEEN the note of 22 December 2023 with which Google LLC communicated that:

it has ordered the blocking of URLs nos. 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 15-24, 26-29 from the European versions of Google search results for searches related to the complainant's name;

the pages linked to the URLs indicated with nos. 3 and 5 are not displayed in Google search results associated with the complainant's name and therefore no action is necessary on the part of the company;

does not believe it can take action with respect to the remaining URLs 1, 6, 8, 10, 13, 14 and 25;

with particular regard to the contents available through URLs 8 and 25, the related contents are updated to the most recent developments in the legal case involving the complainant and are, moreover, recently published; the first, "in addition to telling about XX (and also mentioned by him in the complaint) also reports recent statements by the complainant";

the pages linked to the aforementioned URLs also contain information on the complainant's business and political career, which are still relevant in light of his role in public life;

"the contents referred to by URL no. 1 are completely inaccessible to Google LLC, as registration on the relevant site is required to access the article. Furthermore, the article appears to contain a so-called slide-show and it is in no way possible to understand whether, by scrolling through these slides, there is updated and/or different information regarding the complainant” who was therefore invited to send a screenshot of the related contents in order to allow an assessment;

“URL no. 6 directs to the recent XX” and that therefore it is a different story from the one “concluded with the XX of which the complainant makes no mention in his complaint and does not provide any information about it”;

URL no. 10 “directs to a dynamic section within the website of a newspaper that groups together the most recent news relating to the complainant, with respect to which it is not possible to claim any right to be forgotten. Indeed, by virtue of the dynamic nature of these search pages, the appearance of further results related to new and different news of public relevance relating to the complainant or a namesake could occur, with consequent undue compression, if the request for removal of the complainant were accepted, of the right to inform and be informed”;

URLs nos. 13 and 14 “both refer to institutional pages of XX” which represents one of the most important XX and which is therefore undoubtedly able to carry out a balanced assessment of the public interest of the content offered on its website; therefore, Google acknowledges XX’s choice to persist in publishing such content, while expressing its willingness to remove such URL in the event of a different assessment by the Guarantor Authority;

SEEN the note of 18 January 2024 with which the interested party represented that:

the URLs that Google declared it wanted to block would still be available in association with his name and surname;

URL no. 1 that the owner found to be inaccessible is still available by attaching the relevant screenshot;

with reference to URL no. 6, it would not be, as stated by Google, a different matter from the one that is the subject of the complaint, taking into account the fact that XX was pronounced on a matter connected to the main judicial one;

with regard to URL no. 10, the page in question is not “dynamic”, as stated by Google and that the news contained therein are all set in a time frame that goes from XX;

the URL indicated with n. 1 is no longer available, while with reference to the one indicated with n. 13 it specified that XX should have “published the acquittal sentence that [has] concerned him and proceeded with the updating of the contents offered on its website”;

finally, even in the pages linked to URLs n. 8 and 25 there are negative and incomplete elements and “the judicial affair is not adequately illustrated by omitting (…) any reference to the acquittal sentence of XX”;

SEEN the feedback note of 21 February 2024 with which Google replied that:

URLs n. 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 15-24, 26-29 have been effectively blocked and are not currently displayed in the search results associated with the complainant's name;

Following the complainant's submission of the screenshot of URL no. 1, the company will block the latter from European versions of the search engine for queries made with the complainant's name;

The content available through URL no. 6, although connected to the main case, differs from it in that the XX reported therein "XX"; it is therefore a substantially different issue, a circumstance to which must be added the consideration of the absence of the element of the passage of time;

URL no. 14, which the complainant in his latest observations has noted to be non-existent, is in fact still visible, confirming, with respect to it and URL no. 13, the assessment already made previously, similarly to the additional URLs nos. 8, 10 and 25 that the company has decided not to remove;

CONSIDERING, preliminarily, that:

with regard to Google LLC, due to the activities carried out in the European context through its offices, the principle of establishment applies and therefore the related processing is subject to the provisions of the Regulation by virtue of the provisions of art. 3, par. 1;

the processing of personal data connected to the use of the Google search engine is however directly managed, also for the EU territory, by Google LLC, having its registered office in the United States;

this circumstance is suitable to establish, pursuant to art. 55, par. 1, of the Regulation, the competence of the Italian Data Protection Authority to decide on complaints submitted to it with reference to its national territory;

CONSIDERING that, unless the fact constitutes a more serious crime, anyone who, in a proceeding before the Data Protection Authority, falsely declares or certifies information or circumstances or produces false acts or documents is liable pursuant to art. 168 of the Code “False statements to the Data Protection Authority and interruption of the execution of the tasks or exercise of the powers of the Data Protection Authority”;

ACKNOWLEDGED that:

Google LLC has declared that it has ordered the blocking of the URLs indicated with the nos. 1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 15-24, 26-29 in the list reported on the first and second pages of the feedback provided by the European versions of the search results for the query related to the complainant's name;

Google has stated that the pages linked to the URLs indicated with nos. 3 and 5 are not displayed among the search results associated with the complainant's name and that therefore no action is necessary by the company;

CONSIDERING that, with reference to the URLs indicated above, there are no conditions for the adoption of measures by the Authority;

CONSIDERING, with regard to the request for removal of the additional URLs indicated in the introductory document filed against Google LLC that, for the purposes of assessing the existence of the conditions for the recognition of the right to be forgotten pursuant to Articles 17, paragraph 1, letter c), and 21, paragraph 1, of the Regulation, it is necessary to take into account, in addition to the element constituted by the passage of time, also the additional criteria expressly identified by the WP Art. 29 - Article 29 Group on the protection of personal data through the specific "Guidelines" adopted on 26 November 2014 following the aforementioned ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union, as well as the more recent "Guidelines" no. 5/2019 adopted by the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) on 7 July 2020, containing the criteria for the application of the right to be forgotten by search engines in light of the Regulation;

NOTED, with reference to the request for removal of the URLs indicated with the nos.6, 8, 10, 13, 14 and 25, that:

the contents linked to the URLs indicated above concern a legal case that ended in XX with the recognition of the interested party's non-involvement;

the pages linked to URLs nos. 10, 13, 14 and 25 contain outdated information regarding the manner in which the case ended;

the article linked to the URL indicated with no. 8 does not clearly report the information relating to the conclusion of the proceedings initiated against the complainant as a result of the recognition of the complainant's non-involvement in the facts being ascertained;

the first in particular, although Google has highlighted its dynamic nature, contains contents that can be placed in the period between XX in which the arrest of the complainant and his involvement in events in which he was recognized as non-involvement is reported;

as regards, instead, the publication of the provisions of XX pronounced, among others, against the whistleblower - available through URLs nos. 13 and 14 - this is also in this case a representation of the facts superseded by the subsequent favorable development which is not mentioned within the relevant pages;

the URL indicated with no. 6, although it concerns a profile different from the one object of the contents linked to the previous URLs, is closely linked to it and does not appear to respond to an independent interest of the public in finding it in association with the name of the interested party;

finally, with regard to the content linked to the URL indicated with no. 25, although the latter reports the news of the interested party's XX, the article does not report the reasons represented by the same and contained in the provision attached to the complaint, or the acknowledged extraneousness to the facts;

the availability on the Internet of dated and outdated or incomplete information, based on the mere association with the name of the interested party, conflicts with the principle of accuracy and updating of data provided for by the Regulation (see art. 5, par. 1, letter d)), as well as with what is stated in the aforementioned "Guidelines" (see point 4 of Part II), as such capable of generating "an inaccurate, inadequate or misleading impression with respect to the interested party";

CONSIDERING, therefore, that the complaint must be considered well-founded in relation to the request for removal of the above-mentioned URLs and that, as a result, Google LLC must be ordered, pursuant to art. 58, par. 2, letters c) and g), of the Regulation, to order their removal as search results found in association with the name of the interested party within twenty days of receipt of this provision;

CONSIDERING, pursuant to art. 17 of the regulation of the Guarantor no. 1/2019, that the conditions exist to proceed with the annotation in the internal register of the Authority referred to in art. 57, par. 1, letter u), of the Regulation, in relation to the measures adopted in the specific case against Google LLC in compliance with art. 58, par. 2, of the same Regulation;

CONSIDERING, however, that the measure adopted in the case in question against the aforementioned company derives from an assessment carried out by the Authority on the basis of the specificities of the individual case and that, therefore, its registration in the internal register cited above cannot be considered, in any future proceedings initiated against the same data controller, as a relevant precedent for the purposes set out in art. 83, par. 2) letter c), of the Regulation;

CONSIDERING that, in the event of failure to comply with the provisions of the Guarantor, the administrative sanction referred to in art. 83, par. 5, letter e), of the Regulation;

SEEN the documentation in the files;

SEEN the observations formulated pursuant to art. 15 of the regulation of the Guarantor n. 1/2000;

REPORTER the lawyer Guido Scorza;

CONSIDERING ALL THE ABOVE, THE GUARANTOR

pursuant to art. 57, par. 1, letter f), of the Regulation:

a) takes note of what was declared by Google regarding the blocking of the URLs indicated with the numbers 1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 15-24, 26-29 from the European versions of the search results for the query related to the name of the complainant and the fact that the pages linked to the URLs indicated with the numbers 3 and 5 are not displayed among the search results associated with the name of the same;

b) declares the complaint founded with regard to the additional URLs subject to the complaint and, accordingly, pursuant to art. 58, par. 2, letters c) and g), of the Regulation, orders Google LLC to remove them from search results found in association with the name of the interested party within twenty days of receiving this provision;

c) orders, pursuant to art. 17 of the regulation of the Guarantor no. 1/2019, the annotation in the internal register of the Authority referred to in art. 57, par. 1, letter u), of the Regulation, of the measures adopted against Google LLC in compliance with art. 58, par. 2, of the Regulation itself, without however attributing to such annotation - for the reasons set out in the introduction - the value of a precedent in any future proceedings initiated against the same data controller, for the purposes set out in art. 83, par. 2), letter c), of the Regulation.

Pursuant to art. 157 of the Code, invites Google LLC to communicate, within thirty days of the date of receipt of this provision, what initiatives have been undertaken in order to implement what is prescribed therein. Please note that failure to respond to the above request is punishable by the administrative sanction referred to in art. 166 of the Code.

Pursuant to art. 78 of the Regulation, as well as arts. 152 of the Code and 10 of Legislative Decree no. 150 of 1 September 2011, an objection to this provision may be lodged with the ordinary judicial authority, with an appeal filed, alternatively, with the court of the place where the data controller resides or has its registered office or with that of the place of residence of the interested party within thirty days from the date of communication of the provision itself or sixty days if the appellant resides abroad.

Rome, 13 November 2024

THE PRESIDENT
Stanzione

THE REPORTER
Scorza

THE SECRETARY GENERAL
Mattei

[web doc. no. 10095553]

Measure of 13 November 2024

Register of measures
no. 756 of 13 November 2024

THE GUARANTOR FOR THE PROTECTION OF PERSONAL DATA

IN today's meeting, attended by Prof. Pasquale Stanzione, President, Prof. Ginevra Cerrina Feroni, Vice President, Dr. Agostino Ghiglia and the lawyer Guido Scorza, members, and Councillor Fabio Mattei, Secretary General;

HAVING SEEN Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 (hereinafter, “Regulation”);

HAVING SEEN the Personal Data Protection Code, containing provisions for the adaptation of national legislation to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (Legislative Decree 30 June 2003, no. 196, as amended by Legislative Decree 10 August 2018, no. 101, hereinafter the “Code”);

HAVING SEEN the complaint submitted to the Guarantor, pursuant to art. 77 of the Regulation, and regularized on 7 December 2023, with which XX requested that Google LLC be ordered to remove from the search results found in association with its name some URLs referring to a legal case that ended against it with the pronouncement of an acquittal sentence pronounced in XX by XX;

WHEREAS the interested party has, in particular, complained of the damage suffered to his personal and professional reputation by the continued availability of the contested contents online, invoking the recognition of the right to be forgotten in light of the time elapsed since the facts and the favorable outcome of the judgment;

SEEN the note of 7 December 2023 with which the Authority asked the data controller to provide his observations in relation to what was represented in the introductory act of the proceeding and to communicate his possible intention to comply with the complainant's requests;

SEEN the note of 22 December 2023 with which Google LLC communicated that:

it has ordered the blocking of URLs nos. 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 15-24, 26-29 from the European versions of Google search results for searches related to the complainant's name;

the pages linked to the URLs indicated with nos. 3 and 5 are not displayed in Google search results associated with the complainant's name and therefore no action is necessary on the part of the company;

does not believe it can take action with respect to the remaining URLs 1, 6, 8, 10, 13, 14 and 25;

with particular regard to the contents available through URLs 8 and 25, the related contents are updated to the most recent developments in the legal case involving the complainant and are, moreover, recently published; the first, "in addition to telling about XX (and also mentioned by him in the complaint) also reports recent statements by the complainant";

the pages linked to the aforementioned URLs also contain information on the complainant's business and political career, which are still relevant in light of his role in public life;

"the contents referred to by URL no. 1 are completely inaccessible to Google LLC, as registration on the relevant site is required to access the article. Furthermore, the article appears to contain a so-called slide-show and it is in no way possible to understand whether, by scrolling through these slides, there is updated and/or different information regarding the complainant” who was therefore invited to send a screenshot of the related contents in order to allow an assessment;

“URL no. 6 directs to the recent XX” and that therefore it is a different story from the one “concluded with XX of which the complainant makes no mention in his complaint and does not provide any information in this regard”;

URL no.10 “directs to a dynamic section within the website of a newspaper that groups together the most recent news relating to the complainant, with respect to which it is not possible to claim any right to be forgotten. Indeed, by virtue of the dynamic nature of such search pages, the appearance of further results related to new and different news of public relevance relating to the complainant or his namesake could occur, with consequent undue compression, if the request for removal of the complainant were accepted, of the right to inform and be informed”;

URLs nos. 13 and 14 “both refer to institutional pages of XX” which represents one of the most relevant XX and which is therefore undoubtedly able to carry out a balanced assessment regarding the public interest of the content offered on its website; therefore, Google acknowledges the choice of XX to persist in publishing such content, while expressing its willingness to remove such URL in the event of a different assessment by the Guarantor Authority;

SEEN the note of 18 January 2024 with which the interested party represented that:

the URLs that Google declared it wanted to block would still be available in association with his name and surname;

URL no. 1 that the owner found to be inaccessible is still available by attaching the relevant screenshot;

with reference to URL no. 6, it would not be, as stated by Google, a different matter from the one that is the subject of the complaint, taking into account the fact that the XX was pronounced on a matter connected to the main judicial one;

with regard to URL no. 10, the page in question is not "dynamic", as stated by Google and that the news contained therein are all placed in a time frame that goes from XX;

the URL indicated with no. 1 is no longer available, while with reference to the one indicated with no. 13 specified that XX should have “published the acquittal judgment that [it] had and updated the contents offered on its website”;

finally, even in the pages linked to URLs nos. 8 and 25, negative and incomplete elements persist and “the legal case is not adequately illustrated by omitting (…) any reference to the acquittal judgment of XX”;

SEEN the response note of 21 February 2024 with which Google replied that:

URLs nos. 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 15-24, 26-29 have actually been blocked and are not currently displayed among the search results associated with the name of the complainant;

following the forwarding by the complainant of the screenshot referring to URL no. 1, the company will block the latter from the European versions of the search engine for queries made with the name of the same;

the content available through URL n. 6, although connected to the main case, differs from it in that the XX reported therein "XX"; it is therefore a substantially different issue, a circumstance to which must be added the consideration of the absence of the element of the passage of time;

URL no. 14, which the complainant in his latest observations has noted to be non-existent, is in fact still visible, confirming, with respect to it and URL no. 13, the assessment already made previously, similarly to the additional URLs nos. 8, 10 and 25 that the company has decided not to remove;

CONSIDERING, preliminarily, that:

with regard to Google LLC, due to the activities carried out in the European context through its offices, the principle of establishment applies and therefore the related processing is subject to the provisions of the Regulation by virtue of the provisions of art. 3, par. 1;

the processing of personal data connected to the use of the Google search engine is however directly managed, also for the EU territory, by Google LLC, having its registered office in the United States;

this circumstance is suitable to establish, pursuant to art. 55, par. 1, of the Regulation, the competence of the Italian Data Protection Authority to decide on complaints submitted to it with reference to its national territory;

CONSIDERING that, unless the fact constitutes a more serious crime, anyone who, in a proceeding before the Data Protection Authority, falsely declares or certifies information or circumstances or produces false acts or documents is liable pursuant to art. 168 of the Code “False statements to the Data Protection Authority and interruption of the execution of the tasks or exercise of the powers of the Data Protection Authority”;

ACKNOWLEDGED that:

Google LLC has declared that it has ordered the blocking of the URLs indicated with the nos. 1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 15-24, 26-29 in the list reported on the first and second pages of the feedback provided by the European versions of the search results for the query related to the complainant's name;

Google has stated that the pages linked to the URLs indicated with nos. 3 and 5 are not displayed among the search results associated with the complainant's name and that therefore no action is necessary by the company;

CONSIDERING that, with reference to the URLs indicated above, there are no conditions for the adoption of measures by the Authority;

CONSIDERING, with regard to the request for removal of the additional URLs indicated in the introductory document filed against Google LLC that, for the purposes of assessing the existence of the conditions for the recognition of the right to be forgotten pursuant to Articles 17, paragraph 1, letter c), and 21, paragraph 1, of the Regulation, it is necessary to take into account, in addition to the element constituted by the passage of time, also the additional criteria expressly identified by the WP Art. 29 - Article 29 Group on the protection of personal data through the specific "Guidelines" adopted on 26 November 2014 following the aforementioned ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union, as well as the more recent "Guidelines" no. 5/2019 adopted by the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) on 7 July 2020, containing the criteria for the application of the right to be forgotten by search engines in light of the Regulation;

NOTED, with reference to the request for removal of the URLs indicated with nos. 6, 8, 10, 13, 14 and 25, that:

the contents linked to the URLs indicated above concern a judicial matter that ended in the XX with the recognition of the non-involvement of the interested party;

the pages linked to the URLs nos. 10, 13, 14 and 25 contain outdated information regarding the manner in which the matter was concluded;

the article linked to the URL indicated with no. 8 does not clearly report the information regarding the conclusion of the proceedings initiated against the complainant as a result of the recognition of his non-involvement in the facts being ascertained;

the first in particular, although Google has highlighted its dynamic nature, contains content that can be placed in the period between XX in which the arrest of the complainant and his involvement in matters in which he has been recognised as non-involved is reported;

with regard to the publication of the provisions of XX pronounced, among others, against the whistleblower – available via URLs nos. 13 and 14 – this is also in this case a representation of the facts that has been superseded by the subsequent favourable development which is not mentioned in the relevant pages;

the URL indicated with no. 6, although it concerns a profile different from the one covered by the contents linked to the previous URLs, is closely linked to it and does not appear to respond to an independent interest of the public in finding it in association with the name of the interested party;

finally, with regard to the content linked to the URL indicated with n. 25, although the latter reports the news of the XX of the interested party, the article does not report the reasons represented by the same and contained in the provision attached to the complaint, or the acknowledged extraneousness to the facts;

the availability on the Internet of dated and outdated or incomplete information, based on the mere association with the name of the interested party, conflicts with the principle of accuracy and updating of data provided for by the Regulation (see art. 5, par. 1, letter d)), as well as with what is stated in the aforementioned "Guidelines" (see point 4 of Part II), as such capable of generating "an inaccurate, inadequate or misleading impression with respect to the interested party";

CONSIDERING, therefore, that the complaint must be considered well-founded in relation to the request for removal of the above-mentioned URLs and that, as a result, Google LLC must be ordered, pursuant to art. 58, par. 2, letters c) and g), of the Regulation, to order their removal as search results found in association with the name of the interested party within twenty days of receipt of this provision;

CONSIDERING, pursuant to art. 17 of the regulation of the Guarantor no. 1/2019, that the conditions exist to proceed with the annotation in the internal register of the Authority referred to in art. 57, par. 1, letter u), of the Regulation, in relation to the measures adopted in the specific case against Google LLC in compliance with art. 58, par. 2, of the same Regulation;

CONSIDERING, however, that the measure adopted in the case in question against the aforementioned company derives from an assessment carried out by the Authority on the basis of the specificities of the individual case and that, therefore, its registration in the internal register cited above cannot be considered, in any future proceedings initiated against the same data controller, as a relevant precedent for the purposes set out in art. 83, par. 2) letter c), of the Regulation;

CONSIDERING that, in the event of failure to comply with the provisions of the Guarantor, the administrative sanction referred to in art. 83, par. 5, letter e), of the Regulation;

SEEN the documentation in the files;

SEEN the observations formulated pursuant to art. 15 of the regulation of the Guarantor n. 1/2000;

REPORTER the lawyer Guido Scorza;

CONSIDERING ALL THE ABOVE, THE GUARANTOR

pursuant to art. 57, par. 1, letter f), of the Regulation:

a) takes note of what was declared by Google regarding the blocking of the URLs indicated with the numbers 1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 15-24, 26-29 from the European versions of the search results for the query related to the name of the complainant and the fact that the pages linked to the URLs indicated with the numbers 3 and 5 are not displayed among the search results associated with the name of the same;

b) declares the complaint founded with regard to the additional URLs subject to the complaint and, accordingly, pursuant to art. 58, par. 2, letters c) and g), of the Regulation, orders Google LLC to remove them from search results found in association with the name of the interested party within twenty days of receiving this provision;

c) orders, pursuant to art. 17 of the regulation of the Guarantor no. 1/2019, the annotation in the internal register of the Authority referred to in art. 57, par. 1, letter u), of the Regulation, of the measures adopted against Google LLC in compliance with art. 58, par. 2, of the Regulation itself, without however attributing to such annotation - for the reasons set out in the introduction - the value of a precedent in any future proceedings initiated against the same data controller, for the purposes set out in art. 83, par. 2), letter c), of the Regulation.

Pursuant to art. 157 of the Code, invites Google LLC to communicate, within thirty days of the date of receipt of this provision, what initiatives have been undertaken in order to implement what is prescribed therein. Please note that failure to respond to the above request is punishable by the administrative sanction referred to in art. 166 of the Code.

Pursuant to art. 78 of the Regulation, as well as arts. 152 of the Code and 10 of Legislative Decree no. 150 of 1 September 2011, an objection to this provision may be lodged with the ordinary judicial authority, with an appeal filed, alternatively, with the court of the place where the data controller resides or has its registered office or with that of the place of residence of the interested party within thirty days from the date of communication of the provision itself or sixty days if the appellant resides abroad.

Rome, 13 November 2024

THE PRESIDENT
Stanzione

THE REPORTER
Scorza

THE SECRETARY GENERAL
Mattei