Tallinna Halduskohus - 3-19-579
| Tallinna Halduskohus - 3-19-579 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court: | CE (France) |
| Jurisdiction: | France |
| Relevant Law: |
Articles 8, 20 and 82 of the French Data Protection Act ePrivacy Directive 2002/58/EC |
| Decided: | 16. 10. 2019 |
| Published: | n/a |
| Parties: | La Quadrature du Net, Caliopen and CNIL |
| National Case Number: | 3-19-579 |
| European Case Law Identifier: | n/a |
| Appeal from: | CNIL (France) |
| Language: | French |
| Original Source: | CONSEIL D'ETAT (in FR) |
22 November 2019, the Tallinn administrative court finds that the AKI (Estonian DPA) must act and issue a decision based on the intent of the submission received, not merely its formal characteristics.
English Summary
Facts
The complainant made a submission to the Estonian DPA, which the DPA interpreted as a request for information and not as a complaint in terms of 77(1) GDPR. The complainant, however, expected the submission to be processed as a GDPR 77(1) complaint.
Dispute
The issue was mainly to know the margin of discretion within which the AKI assesses the complaints submitted and to what extend the administative judge can review it.
Holding
The court found that the complainant's submission to the DPA clearly requested DPA assistance in preventing unlawful use of the complainant's personal data and interpreting it merely as a request for information was not justified. The court emphasized that the intent of a submission must be considered by the DPA and that a more convenient process cannot be selected merely because a complaint is vaguely formulated or the content briefly stated. The court further noted that a complainant does not need to outline which data protection measures they expect the DPA to undertake, nor do they even need to understand what are the measures available to the DPA - rather, the DPA must evaluate the substance of a complaint and decide for itself which measures are appropriate and accompany any refusal to process a complaint with the required justification.
The decision references GDPR 77(1) and Estonian Data Protection Act §28 p 1.
Comment
Share your comment on the decision here!
Further Resources
Share blogs or news articles here!
English Machine Translation of the Decision
The decision below is a machine translation of the original. Please refer to the French original for more details.
to be completed..
