CJEU case C-288/12 European Commission v Hungary – CJEU Judgment (European Union, 2014)
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 of the European Union found that Hungary broke EU rules by ending the term of its Data Protection Supervisor early. This is important because it stresses the need for independent data protection authorities to safeguard privacy rights. The ruling underscores the necessity of stable, independent oversight in data protection matters.
What happened
Hungary ended the term of its Data Protection Supervisor early, which the court found violated EU independence rules.
Who was affected
The ruling affected the Hungarian Data Protection Supervisor, who was prematurely removed from their position meant to ensure independent oversight.
What the authority found
The court ruled that Hungary's action of removing the Data Protection Supervisor early breached the requirement for independent data protection oversight.
Why this matters
This ruling emphasizes the critical role of independent data protection authorities in upholding privacy rights. It serves as a warning to governments to respect the independence and terms of data protection roles to maintain effective privacy oversight.
On 29 September 2008, Mr Jori was appointed Data Protection Supervisor for a 6 year term, which would terminate around the end of September 2014. However, Mr Jori was asked to vacate the office on 31 December 2011. Upon proposal by the Hungarian Prime Minister, Mr Peterfalvi was appointed as Head Authority for a term of nine years. The AG considers that the European Commission does not dispute in any way the right of Hungary to modify its institutional set up for its data protection authority. The issue disputed is that, in changing the institutional set up, Hungary failed to fulfil its obligation to respect the independence of their supervisor by terminating its employment before the beginning of their term. [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:31995L0046 Article 28(1) Dir.95/46] puts forward the need for supervision of the personal data protection by an independent authority as an essential component of the protection of individual in personal data processing. As found by the [https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=79752&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=682589 CJEU in C-518/07], the term “with complete independence” is interpreted broadly and autonomously in light of the objective to ensure the effectiveness and reliability of the supervision of data protection compliance. Moreover, the guarantee of independence is established not to grant a special status to those authorities themselves as well as their agents but rather to strengthen the protection of individuals and bodies affected by their decisions. Still from [https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=79752&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=682589 CJEU in C-518/07], the CJEU held that actions that may lead to “prior compliance” would not be consistent with the requirement of “complete independence” which Member States must guarantee their supervisory authority. The AG shares the E
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-288/12 European Commission v Hungary in EU
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. CJEU case C-288/12 European Commission v Hungary - European Union (2014). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: