Editing Rb. Amsterdam - C/13/694440 / KG ZA 20-1118

From GDPRhub

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 56: Line 56:
 
}}
 
}}
  
The Amsterdam Court of First Instance referred multiple questions to the Supreme Court concerning the processing done by a credit institution and their legal bases. In particular, the court asked whether the the person whose personal data have been recorded is entitled to invoke the right to erasure and  a right of objection as referred to in Article 17 and 21 of the GDPR.  
+
The Amsterdam Court of First Instance referred multiple questions to the Supreme Court concerning the processing done by a credit institution and their legal bases.  
 +
 
 +
In particular, the following questions were referred:
 +
 
 +
1. Should the processing of concrete personal data by a credit institution, by means of an individual registration in the system of the BKR, be assessed against the provisions of Article 6(1)(c) of the GDPR, or Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR, or both provisions?
 +
 
 +
2. Does the answer to question 1 mean that
 +
 
 +
a. the person whose personal data have been recorded is not entitled to invoke the right to erasure referred to in Article 17 of the GDPR?
 +
 
 +
b. the person is not entitled to a right of objection as referred to in Article 21 of the GDPR?
 +
 
 +
3. If the answer to question 2.b. means that no right of objection as referred to in Article 21 of the GDPR exists in the case of a BKR registration, does that mean that Article 35 of the GDPR Implementation Act plays no role in the legal proceedings to delete that registration?
 
==English Summary==
 
==English Summary==
  
Line 72: Line 84:
 
The Court considered that there is doubt about whether Hoist Finance as a participant in the credit registration system makes credit registrations under Article 6(1)(c) or Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR. If is also unclear whether the right to objection applies to BKR registrations and how Article 35(2) of the GDPR Implementation Act should be applied. The Court has mentioned three recent judgements.
 
The Court considered that there is doubt about whether Hoist Finance as a participant in the credit registration system makes credit registrations under Article 6(1)(c) or Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR. If is also unclear whether the right to objection applies to BKR registrations and how Article 35(2) of the GDPR Implementation Act should be applied. The Court has mentioned three recent judgements.
 
Because of this uncertainty the Court is referring the following questions for the Supreme Court:
 
Because of this uncertainty the Court is referring the following questions for the Supreme Court:
 
 
1. Should the processing of concrete personal data by a credit institution, by means of an individual registration in the system of the BKR, be assessed against the provisions of Article 6(1)(c) of the GDPR, or Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR, or both provisions?
 
1. Should the processing of concrete personal data by a credit institution, by means of an individual registration in the system of the BKR, be assessed against the provisions of Article 6(1)(c) of the GDPR, or Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR, or both provisions?
 
 
2. Does the answer to question 1 mean that
 
2. Does the answer to question 1 mean that
 
 
a. the person whose personal data have been recorded is not entitled to invoke the right to erasure referred to in Article 17 of the GDPR?
 
a. the person whose personal data have been recorded is not entitled to invoke the right to erasure referred to in Article 17 of the GDPR?
 
 
b. the person is not entitled to a right of objection as referred to in Article 21 of the GDPR?
 
b. the person is not entitled to a right of objection as referred to in Article 21 of the GDPR?
 
 
3. If the answer to question 2.b. means that no right of objection as referred to in Article 21 of the GDPR exists in the case of a BKR registration, does that mean that Article 35 of the GDPR Implementation Act plays no role in the legal proceedings to delete that registration?
 
3. If the answer to question 2.b. means that no right of objection as referred to in Article 21 of the GDPR exists in the case of a BKR registration, does that mean that Article 35 of the GDPR Implementation Act plays no role in the legal proceedings to delete that registration?
  

Please note that all contributions to GDPRhub are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (see GDPRhub:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To edit this page, please answer the question that appears below (more info):

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)

Template used on this page: