Case C-460/20, TU, RE v. Google LLC (C.J.E.U.)

Ozlem Ulgen
{"title":"Case C-460/20, TU, RE v. Google LLC (C.J.E.U.)","authors":"Ozlem Ulgen","doi":"10.1017/ilm.2023.31","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"On December 8, 2022, in a case relating to a de-referencing request to an internet search engine operator on the basis of inaccurate information, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) delivered its judgment (the Judgment) on the interpretation of the right to erasure (right to be forgotten) under Article 17 of the EU General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679 (GDPR), and the rights of access and objection under Articles 12 and 14 of the EU Directive 95/46/EC (the Directive), in light of fundamental rights to privacy, protection of personal data, and freedom of expression and information under Articles 7, 8, and 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter). The case establishes that the burden of proof is on the person requesting de-referencing to show manifest inaccuracy of information, but this does not require them to seek a judicial remedy against the website publisher before requesting de-referencing. Although the search engine operator is obliged to carry out checks to confirm the merits of the request, it has no obligation to investigate the facts and probe further with the website publisher. However, it must de-reference where relevant and sufficient evidence is submitted to show manifest inaccuracy, and it must display a warning where it is made aware of judicial proceedings.","PeriodicalId":212220,"journal":{"name":"International Legal Materials","volume":"92 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Legal Materials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2023.31","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

On December 8, 2022, in a case relating to a de-referencing request to an internet search engine operator on the basis of inaccurate information, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) delivered its judgment (the Judgment) on the interpretation of the right to erasure (right to be forgotten) under Article 17 of the EU General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679 (GDPR), and the rights of access and objection under Articles 12 and 14 of the EU Directive 95/46/EC (the Directive), in light of fundamental rights to privacy, protection of personal data, and freedom of expression and information under Articles 7, 8, and 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter). The case establishes that the burden of proof is on the person requesting de-referencing to show manifest inaccuracy of information, but this does not require them to seek a judicial remedy against the website publisher before requesting de-referencing. Although the search engine operator is obliged to carry out checks to confirm the merits of the request, it has no obligation to investigate the facts and probe further with the website publisher. However, it must de-reference where relevant and sufficient evidence is submitted to show manifest inaccuracy, and it must display a warning where it is made aware of judicial proceedings.
案件C-460/20, TU, RE诉谷歌有限责任公司(C.J.E.U.)
2022年12月8日,在一起涉及基于不准确信息向互联网搜索引擎运营商提出去引用请求的案件中,欧盟法院(CJEU)就《欧盟通用数据保护条例2016/679》(GDPR)第17条对删除权(被遗忘权)的解释作出了判决(该判决)。以及《欧盟基本权利宪章》第7、8和11条所规定的隐私权、个人数据保护以及言论和信息自由的基本权利,根据欧盟指令95/46/EC(以下简称“指令”)第12和14条所规定的访问权和反对权。本案规定,要求取消引用以证明信息明显不准确的举证责任在请求取消引用的人身上,但这并不要求他们在请求取消引用之前向网站发布者寻求司法救济。虽然搜索引擎运营商有义务进行检查以确认请求的是非曲直,但它没有义务调查事实并与网站发布者进一步调查。但是,如果提交了相关的和充分的证据来表明明显的不准确,它必须取消引用,如果它知道司法程序,它必须显示警告。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信