Enforcing jurisdiction
European Union · Geography does not establish applicable law.
Confirmed applicable legislation
Privacy topics

ZQ – CJEU Judgment (European Union, 2023)

CJEU Judgment
Court of Justice of the European Union21 December 2023European Union
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 of the European Union ruled on the processing of health data by a medical service. The court examined whether the service could process an employee's health data for work capacity assessments. This ruling clarifies the conditions under which health data can be processed in employment contexts.

What happened

The CJEU addressed the legality of a medical service processing an employee's health data for assessing their work capacity.

Who was affected

The employee whose health data was processed by the medical service.

What the authority found

The court ruled that processing health data is permissible under certain conditions, but additional data protection requirements must be met.

Why this matters

This ruling highlights the complexities of processing sensitive health data in the workplace. Employers must ensure compliance with strict data protection standards when handling such information.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 24 GDPR
Art. 5(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 6(1) GDPR
Art. 9(1) GDPR
Art. 9(2)(h) GDPR
Art. 9(3) GDPR
Art. 32(1) GDPR
Art. 82(1) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 5(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 6(1) GDPR
Art. 9(1) GDPR
Art. 9(2)(h) GDPR
Art. 9(3) GDPR
Art. 24(GDPR)
Art. 32(1) GDPR
Art. 82(1) GDPR

Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.

National Law Articles
AI-identified
Artikel 275 (1) Sozialgesetzbuch
Artikel 2758 (1) Sozialgesetzbuch
274110
Decision AuthorityCJEU

Source checks

Secondary-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 19 March 2026.

Processing notes: articles 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

Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The Medical Service of Health Insurance (the controller) is Germany's public health insurance medical review service. It provides expert reports when people say they are unable to work, as well as for its own staff. Before becoming unable to work, the data subject worked for the controller. The insurance company that was paying their benefits requested an expert opinion from the controller. The controller obtained health information from the data subject's doctor in the form of a medical report, which was then distributed to the data subject's coworkers. The data subject believed that their medical data had been unlawfully processed and sought €20,000 in damages from the controller, who rejected the claims. According to the data subject, the evaluation should have been performed by another organisation in order to prevent coworkers from accessing their medical data. Furthermore, they considered the security procedures around their medical report's archiving to be inadequate. After being rejected at first and second (Landesarbeitsgericht Düsseldorf) instance, the the data subject appealed to the Federal Labour Court, who referred the case to the CJEU with the following questions: On the topic of health data 1) Does Article 9(2)(h) GDPR prohibit a medical service of a health insurance fund from processing its employee’s health data when it is a prerequisite for the assessment of that employee’s working capacity? 2) If the Court answers Question 1 in the negative (with the consequence that an exception to the prohibition on the processing of data concerning health laid down in Article 9(1) GDPR is possible under Article 9(2)(h) GDPR) in a case such as the present one, are there further data protection requirements, beyond the conditions set out in Article 9(3) GDPR, that must be complied with, and, if so, which ones? 3) If the Court answers Question 1 in the negative, does the permissibility or lawfulness of the processing of data concerning health depend on the fulf

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 ZQ in EU

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

Details

Judgment Date

21 December 2023

Authority

Court of Justice of the European Union

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. ZQ - European Union (2023). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: