# C_2022207EN.01001601.xml

| 23.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 207/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 207/16

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Unabhängige Schiedskommission Wien (Austria) lodged on 17 February 2022 — E.N.

(Case C-115/22)

(2022/C 207/23)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Unabhängige Schiedskommission Wien

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: E.N.

Interested parties: Nationale Anti-Doping Agentur Austria GmbH (NADA), Österreichischer Leichtathletikverband (ÖLV), Word Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)

Questions referred

| 1. | Does the information that a certain person has committed a specific doping violation, as a result of which that person has been banned from taking part in (national and international) competitions, constitute ‘data concerning health’ within the meaning of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (‘the General Data Protection Regulation’)? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the information that a certain person has committed a specific doping violation, as a result of which that person has been banned from taking part in (national and international) competitions, constitute ‘data concerning health’ within the meaning of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (‘the General Data Protection Regulation’)?

| 2. | Does the General Data Protection Regulation — particularly in the light of the second subparagraph of Article 6(3) thereof — preclude a national provision that provides for the disclosure of the name of the persons concerned by the decision of the Independent Arbitration Committee, the duration of the ban and the reasons for it, without it being possible to infer the health data of the person concerned? Is it relevant that disclosure of that information to the general public can only be omitted under the national provision if the person concerned is a recreational athlete, a minor or a person who has contributed significantly to the detection of potential anti-doping violations by disclosing information or other indications? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does the General Data Protection Regulation — particularly in the light of the second subparagraph of Article 6(3) thereof — preclude a national provision that provides for the disclosure of the name of the persons concerned by the decision of the Independent Arbitration Committee, the duration of the ban and the reasons for it, without it being possible to infer the health data of the person concerned? Is it relevant that disclosure of that information to the general public can only be omitted under the national provision if the person concerned is a recreational athlete, a minor or a person who has contributed significantly to the detection of potential anti-doping violations by disclosing information or other indications?

| 3. | Does the General Data Protection Regulation — particularly in the light of the principles in Article 5(1)(a) and (c) thereof — in any case prior to the disclosure, require a balancing of interests between the personal interests of the person concerned that will be affected by the disclosure, on the one hand, and the interest of the general public in being informed of the anti-doping violation committed by an athlete, on the other? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does the General Data Protection Regulation — particularly in the light of the principles in Article 5(1)(a) and (c) thereof — in any case prior to the disclosure, require a balancing of interests between the personal interests of the person concerned that will be affected by the disclosure, on the one hand, and the interest of the general public in being informed of the anti-doping violation committed by an athlete, on the other?

| 4. | Does the disclosure of the information that a certain person has committed a specific doping violation, as a result of which that person has been banned from taking part in (national and international) competitions, constitute the processing of personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences within the meaning of Article 10 of the General Data Protection Regulation? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Does the disclosure of the information that a certain person has committed a specific doping violation, as a result of which that person has been banned from taking part in (national and international) competitions, constitute the processing of personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences within the meaning of Article 10 of the General Data Protection Regulation?

| 5. | If Question IV is answered in the affirmative: Is the Independent Arbitration Committee established under Paragraph 8 of the 2021 ADBG an official authority within the meaning of Article 10 of the General Data Protection Regulation? |
| --- | --- |

5.

If Question IV is answered in the affirmative: Is the Independent Arbitration Committee established under Paragraph 8 of the 2021 ADBG an official authority within the meaning of Article 10 of the General Data Protection Regulation?

---

(1)  Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ 2016 L 119, p. 1).

---