CJEU case C-25/17 Jehovan todistajat – CJEU Judgment (Finland, 2018)

CJEU Judgment
Court of Justice of the European Union10 July 2018Finland
final
CJEU Judgment

CJEU judgment — not a DPA enforcement action

This is a Court of Justice ruling, not an enforcement action by a data protection authority. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.

The Court of Justice decided that the Jehovah’s Witnesses Community must follow data protection rules when collecting personal data during door-to-door preaching. This means religious groups can't ignore privacy laws when gathering information. The decision emphasizes that all organizations, including religious ones, must comply with data protection standards.

What happened

The Jehovah’s Witnesses Community was required to comply with data protection rules for personal data collected during door-to-door preaching.

Who was affected

People visited by Jehovah’s Witnesses members during door-to-door preaching.

What the authority found

The Court ruled that the Jehovah’s Witnesses Community is responsible for ensuring data protection compliance when collecting personal data, under Directive 95/46/EC.

Why this matters

This decision highlights that all organizations, even religious communities, must adhere to data protection laws when collecting personal data. It sets a precedent for how data protection rules apply to non-commercial activities.

Decision AuthorityCJEU
Reviewed AuthoritySupreme Administrative Court (Finland)
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

Following a request from the Finnish DPA, the Finnish Data Protection Board adopted a decision prohibiting a religious community (the Jehovah’s Witnesses Community) from collecting or processing personal data in the course of door-to-door preaching carried out by its members unless the legal requirements for processing were satisfied. The Data Protection Board imposed a ban on the collection of personal data by the Jehovah’s Witnesses Community for a period of six months unless those conditions were observed. The Jehovah’s Witnesses Community appealed the decision before the Administrative Court in Helsinki, Finland (Helsingin hallinto-oikeus), which annulled the decision on the grounds, inter alia, that the Jehovah’s Witnesses Community was not a controller and that its activity did not constitute unlawful processing. The DPA challenged that judgment before the Supreme Administrative Court in Finland (Korkein hallinto-oikeus). The Supreme Administrative Court referred questions to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling on the following matters: (1) Whether the collection and other processing of personal data carried out by the members of a religious community in connection with door-to-door preaching fall outside the scope of the Data Protection Directive 95/46 under the exceptions stipulated in [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A31995L0046 Article 3(2) of the Data Protection Directive 95/46]? (2) Whether personal data collected otherwise than by automatic means in connection with the door-to-door preaching constitute a 'filing system' in light of [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A31995L0046 Article 2(c) of the Data Protection Directive 95/46]? (3) Whether the phrase “alone or jointly with others determines the purposes and means of the processing of personal data” in light of [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A31995L0046 Article 2(d) of the Data Protection Directive 95/46] means that a r

Outcome

CJEU Judgment

A judgment by the Court of Justice of the European Union, typically on a preliminary reference from a national court.

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for CJEU case C-25/17 Jehovan todistajat in FI

This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.

Details

Judgment Date

10 July 2018

Authority

Court of Justice of the European Union

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. CJEU case C-25/17 Jehovan todistajat - Finland (2018). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: