European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) – CJEU Judgment (European Union, 2025)
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 EDPS brought an appeal against an order of the General Court ([https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=277141&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1 T 578/22]) which ruled that an action for annulment brought by the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) against Articles 74(a) and 74(b) of [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/794/oj/eng Regulation (EU) 2016/794] as amended by [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/991/oj/eng Regulation (EU) 2022/991] was inadmissible. The General Court had found that the EDPS did not enjoy the locus standi enjoyed by Member States and on certain EU Institutions as in [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT:en:PDF Article 263(2)-(3) TFEU], and may only challenge the validity of the contested provision if they fulfil the conditions laid down [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT:en:PDF Article 263(4) TFEU]. The EDPS had claimed that the contested provisions had the effect of retroactively legalising certain practices of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) in the field of data protection, against which the EDPS had found its decision of 3 January 2022. The provisions confer on Member States the possibility to retroactively authorise Europol to process large data sets which have already been shared with Europol prior to the entry into force of the amending Regulation. This, the EDPS claimed, impacted their independence. In their appeal, the EDPS argued that the General Court should have recognised their right to legal standing to challenge the contested decision, irrespective of the requirements of [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT:en:PDF Article 263 TFEU]. The failure to do so, they argued, would deprive an independent supervisory authority, within the meaning of Article 8(3) of the Charter, of the right to proceedings before a court to protect in
The EDPS brought an appeal against an order of the General Court ([https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=277141&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1 T 578/22]) which ruled that an action for annulment brought by the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) against Articles 74(a) and 74(b) of [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/794/oj/eng Regulation (EU) 2016/794] as amended by [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/991/oj/eng Regulation (EU) 2022/991] was inadmissible. The General Court had found that the EDPS did not enjoy the locus standi enjoyed by Member States and on certain EU Institutions as in [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT:en:PDF Article 263(2)-(3) TFEU], and may only challenge the validity of the contested provision if they fulfil the conditions laid down [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT:en:PDF Article 263(4) TFEU]. The EDPS had claimed that the contested provisions had the effect of retroactively legalising certain practices of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) in the field of data protection, against which the EDPS had found its decision of 3 January 2022. The provisions confer on Member States the possibility to retroactively authorise Europol to process large data sets which have already been shared with Europol prior to the entry into force of the amending Regulation. This, the EDPS claimed, impacted their independence. In their appeal, the EDPS argued that the General Court should have recognised their right to legal standing to challenge the contested decision, irrespective of the requirements of [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT:en:PDF Article 263 TFEU]. The failure to do so, they argued, would deprive an independent supervisory authority, within the meaning of Article 8(3) of the Charter, of the right to proceedings before a court to protect in
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 European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) in EU
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) - European Union (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: