Google – Complaint Upheld (Italy, 2025)

Complaint Upheld
Garante per la protezione dei dati personali29 April 2025Italy
final
ePrivacy
Complaint Upheld

Google received a request to remove links to news articles about a past criminal case involving a person. The company refused, saying the articles were still relevant. This decision highlights the ongoing debate over the right to be forgotten and how companies handle sensitive information.

What happened

A person asked Google to remove URLs linking to press reports about their past criminal case under the right to be forgotten.

Who was affected

The request came from a person whose name was linked to articles about a criminal case involving extortion and bankruptcy.

What the authority found

The Italian data protection authority found that Google had already removed some links but ruled that the remaining articles could stay online due to their public relevance.

Why this matters

This case emphasizes the challenges individuals face when trying to erase their digital past. Companies should carefully consider how they handle requests for content removal to avoid potential disputes.

GDPR Articles Cited

AI-verified

Art. 17(GDPR)
View original scraped data
Art. 17(GDPR)

Original data from scraper before AI verification against source document.

Source verified 11 April 2026
articles corrected
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

On 21 March 2024, the data subject submitted a request to Google LLC invoking the right to be forgotten under Article 17 GDPR, seeking removal of eight URLs linking his name to press reports about a 2015–2020 criminal case involving extortion and fraudulent bankruptcy. The criminal proceedings against the data subject had concluded in 2020 with a two-year sentence following a plea bargain. The data subject argued that continued indexing of those articles, five years after the judgment, violated his right to erasure under Article 17 GDPR as they no longer served any public or social interest. Google rejected the request, maintaining that the material remained of public relevance given the seriousness of the offences, their organised-crime context, and the complainant’s ongoing professional activity in similar sectors. On 24 May 2024, the data subject filed a formal complaint with the DPA under Article 77 GDPR. The complainant argued that his role in the criminal case had been marginal, and that persistent indexing of his name caused reputational harm. The DPA examined the complaint under Articles 17(1)(c) and 21(1) GDPR, applying the balancing criteria established in the WP29 Guidelines (2014) and EDPB Guidelines 5/2019. It as noted that Google had already de-indexed four URLs mentioned in the complaint and therefore found no basis for further action regarding them. As to the remaining links, the DPA held that two of the URLs concerned recent, accurate reports about a criminal case of ongoing public importance tied to organised-crime infiltration in the Veneto region and that the data subject was an emblematic participant in that context. The data subject's continuing professional activity in related sectors further supported the public interest factor. Accordingly, the request to delist these URLs was rejected. Two other URLs were found to lack sufficient public-interest justification. One referred only to early-stage investigations, while the other reproduced a

Outcome

Complaint Upheld

A data subject complaint that was upheld by the DPA.

Details

Decision Date

29 April 2025

Authority

Garante per la protezione dei dati personali

GDPRhub ID

gdprhub-9589

About this data

Data: GDPRhub (noyb.eu)
Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
AI-verified and classified

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Google - Italy (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: