EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62007CA0553
Case C-553/07: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 7 May 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands)) — College van burgemeester en wethouders van Rotterdam v M.E.E. Rijkeboer (Protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data — Directive 95/46/EC — Respect for private life — Erasure of data — Right of access to data and to information on the recipients of data — Time-limit on the exercise of the right to access)
Case C-553/07: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 7 May 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands)) — College van burgemeester en wethouders van Rotterdam v M.E.E. Rijkeboer (Protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data — Directive 95/46/EC — Respect for private life — Erasure of data — Right of access to data and to information on the recipients of data — Time-limit on the exercise of the right to access)
Case C-553/07: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 7 May 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands)) — College van burgemeester en wethouders van Rotterdam v M.E.E. Rijkeboer (Protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data — Directive 95/46/EC — Respect for private life — Erasure of data — Right of access to data and to information on the recipients of data — Time-limit on the exercise of the right to access)
OJ C 153, 4.7.2009, p. 10–10
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
4.7.2009 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 153/10 |
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 7 May 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands)) — College van burgemeester en wethouders van Rotterdam v M.E.E. Rijkeboer
(Case C-553/07) (1)
(Protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data - Directive 95/46/EC - Respect for private life - Erasure of data - Right of access to data and to information on the recipients of data - Time-limit on the exercise of the right to access)
2009/C 153/19
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Raad van State
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: College van burgemeester en wethouders van Rotterdam
Defendant: M.E.E. Rijkeboer
Re:
Preliminary ruling — Raad van State (Netherlands) — Interpretation of Articles 6(1)(e) and 12(a) of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (OJ 1995 L 281, p. 31) — National legislation limiting the right of access to data processed during the year prior to the request for access — Principle of proportionality
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
Article 12(a) of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data requires Member States to ensure a right of access to information on the recipients or categories of recipient of personal data and on the content of the data disclosed not only in respect of the present but also in respect of the past. It is for Member States to fix a time-limit for storage of that information and to provide for access to that information which constitutes a fair balance between, on the one hand, the interest of the data subject in protecting his privacy, in particular by way of his rights to object and to bring legal proceedings and, on the other, the burden which the obligation to store that information represents for the controller. |
|
2. |
Rules limiting the storage of information on the recipients or categories of recipient of personal data and on the content of the data disclosed to a period of one year and correspondingly limiting access to that information, while basic data is stored for a much longer period, do not constitute a fair balance of the interest and obligation at issue, unless it can be shown that longer storage of that information would constitute an excessive burden on the controller. It is, however, for national courts to make the determinations necessary. |