- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Germany · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- No confirmed legal basis recorded.
- Privacy topics
Heinz Huber – CJEU Judgment (Germany, 2008)
CJEU precedent (Directive 95/46/EC, pre-GDPR)
This is a Court of Justice judgment predating the GDPR. It interprets Directive 95/46/EC (the Data Protection Directive). It is not a cookie or ePrivacy case and is excluded from cookie statistics and the Risk Calculator.
The Court of Justice ruled that a foreign register storing personal data for public authorities can be legitimate but must comply with non-discrimination principles. This is important as it addresses how personal data of non-nationals is treated. Businesses should ensure their data practices do not discriminate based on nationality.
What happened
Heinz Huber challenged the processing of his personal data in a register for foreigners in Germany.
Who was affected
Heinz Huber, an Austrian citizen living in Germany.
What the authority found
The Court held that using a foreign register is permissible if it complies with non-discrimination principles and only contains necessary data.
Why this matters
This ruling highlights the need for fair treatment in data processing across nationalities, urging companies to avoid discriminatory practices in their data handling.
Source checks
Linked-source text retrieved.
Automated check recorded — 21 March 2026.
Processing notes: articles corrected, national law identified, authority corrected.
Retrieved text may be a secondary summary or an announcement. These automated statuses do not establish that the original decision was read or that the record received an independent legal review. How we check sources
In 1996, the Austrian citizen Heinz Huber moved to Germany to become self-employed as an insurance agent. As a non-national of Germany his data was stored in the register of foreigners, including his name, date and place of birth, nationality, sex, marital and residential status, previous domiciles as well as an assigned reference number used by the public authorities in charge. Since such a register did not exist for German nationals, Mr. Huber felt discriminated by the processing of his data within and requested a deletion thereof. His erasure request was rejected by the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, the public authority in charge of the register. Mr. Huber brought legal action before the administrative courts in Germany further challenged by the authority. Since there were serious doubts regarding whether such a different treatment of nationals and non-nationals can be justified, the Higher Administrative Court of Nordrhein-Westfalen referred several questions regarding the compatibility with the principle of necessity and the prohibition of discrimination to CJEU for a preliminary ruling. The European Court of Justice (CJEU) held that the use of a foreign register for the purpose of providing support to the authorities responsible for the right of residence is, in principle, legitimate and compatible with the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality laid down by [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT&from=EN Article 12(1) ECFR]. It is necessary for Member States to have the relevant particulars and documents available in order to ascertain whether a right of residence in its territory exists for nationals of other Member States. However, this requires that the register contains only data necessary for these purposes and that its centralised nature enables corresponding legislation to be more effectively applied. Similarly, Union law does not exclude Member States from adopting measures enabling the national authorities to have an exact knowledge of population movements affecting their territory and to collect statistics relating to migratory flows. However, the storage and processing of personal data containing individualised personal information in a register for statistical purposes cannot be considered to be necessary within the meaning of [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:31995L0046&from=EN Article 7(e) of Directive 95/46]. In terms of fighting crime, the CJEU held that the prosecution of crimes and offences committed is irrespective of the nationality of their perpetrators. Any different treatment between nationals and non-nationals of a Member State constitutes discrimination prohibited by [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT&from=EN Article 12(1) ECFR]. It therefore precludes Member States from establishing systems for the purpose of fighting crime by processing personal data specific to non-nationals.
Outcome
CJEU Case
A judgment or Advocate General opinion in a case before the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Heinz Huber in DE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
Judgment Date
16 December 2008
Authority
Court of Justice of the European Union
GDPRhub ID
gdprhub-cjeu-4289About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Heinz Huber - Germany (2008). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: