Judgment of the Court of Justice Regarding the Right to be Forgotten

The Court of Justice of the European Union ("Court of Justice/ The Court") issued a press release on December 8, 2022.

Two managers of a group of investment companies requested Google to de-reference results of a search made on the basis of their names, which provided links to certain articles criticizing that group’s investment model. They assert that those articles contain inaccurate claims.

Google refused to comply with that request, referring to the professional context in which those articles and photos were set and arguing that it was unaware whether the information contained in those articles was accurate or not.

The German Federal Court of Justice, before which the dispute was brought, requested the Court of Justice to provide an interpretation of the general data protection regulation, which governs the right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’) as well as the directive on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data, read in the light of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

The Court points out that the right to protection of personal data is not an absolute right but must be considered in relation to its function in society and be balanced against other fundamental rights, in accordance with the principle of proportionality. Accordingly, the general data protection regulation expressly provides that the right to erasure is excluded where processing is necessary for the exercise of the right, in particular, of information.

However, the right to freedom of expression and information cannot be taken into account where, at the very least, a part – which is not of minor importance – of the information found in the referenced content proves to be inaccurate.

• As regards, first, the obligations of the person requesting de-referencing on account of inaccurate content, the Court states that it is for the person making such request to establish the manifest inaccuracy of the information or of a part of that information which is not of minor importance.
• As regards, second, the obligations and responsibilities incumbent on the operator of the search engine, the Court considers that, following a request for de-referencing, the operator of the search engine must take into account all the rights and interests involved and all the circumstances of the case, in order to determine whether the content may continue to be included in the list of search results carried out using its search engine.

Therefore, where the person who has made a request for de-referencing submits relevant and sufficient evidence capable of substantiating his or her request and of establishing the manifest inaccuracy of the information found in the referenced content, the operator of the search engine is required to accede to that request.

As regards the display of photos in the form of thumbnails, the Court states that the display, following a search by name, in the form of thumbnails, of photos of the data subject is such as to constitute a particularly significant interference with that person’s rights to private life and their personal data.

You can reach further information here.

Kind regards,

Zumbul Attorneys at Law

info@zumbul.av.tr