- Enforcing jurisdiction
- European Union · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- No confirmed legal basis recorded.
- Privacy topics
CJEU case T-190/10 Egan Hackett – CJEU Judgment (European Union, 2012)
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 the European Parliament must consider privacy before denying access to documents. This matters because it protects the rights of individuals while balancing transparency in government. The decision highlights the need for careful evaluation of privacy impacts when handling sensitive information.
What happened
The European Parliament denied access to documents that could reveal the identities of former MEP assistants.
Who was affected
Former MEP assistants whose identities could be disclosed through the requested documents.
What the authority found
The Court held that the Parliament's blanket denial of access without considering privacy implications was not justified.
Why this matters
This ruling reinforces the importance of evaluating privacy concerns when making decisions about document access. Organizations should ensure they assess privacy impacts before denying access to information.
Source checks
Secondary-source text retrieved.
Automated check recorded — 19 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
The claimants, which had worked for former MEPs, asked for the annulment of a decision by the European Parliament which would deny them access to Parliamentary Assistance Allowance documents. They needed access to these documents for legal proceedings. The European Parliament refused access based on article 4 (1) (b) Regulation 1049/2001 and article 3 (2) Regulation 45/2001, except that lists open to the public during the period of professional activity of the persons. The requested documents would reveal the political view of former MEP assistants and this constitutes sensitive data. The CJEU held that the strict view the EP held, by automatically denying access to documents revealing the identity of former MEP assistants, without considering the circumstances, holds no grounds. The CJEU held that withholding disclosure is possible, but only after an assessment of the situation was made, and how publicising those documents would impact the privacy of the assistants of former MEPs. The Parliamant thus failed to show to what extent the disclose would specifically and effectively undermine the right to privacy.
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 CJEU case T-190/10 Egan Hackett in EU
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
Judgment Date
28 March 2012
Authority
Court of Justice of the European Union
GDPRhub ID
gdprhub-cjeu-4421About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. CJEU case T-190/10 Egan Hackett - European Union (2012). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: