Joined Cases C-203/15 and C-698/15: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Kammarrätten i Stockholm and the Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) — Sweden, United Kingdom) — Tele2 Sverige AB v Post- och telestyrelsen (C-203/15), Secretary of State for the Home Department v Tom Watson, Peter Brice, Geoffrey Lewis (C-698/15) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Electronic communications — Processing of personal data — Confidentiality of electronic communications — Protection — Directive 2002/58/EC — Articles 5, 6 and 9 and Article 15(1) — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Articles 7, 8 and 11 and Article 52(1) — National legislation — Providers of electronic communications services — Obligation relating to the general and indiscriminate retention of traffic and location data — National authorities — Access to data — No prior review by a court or independent administrative authority — Compatibility with EU law)
Date: 2016-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: confidentiality, crime, data collection, data protection, exchange of information, information storage, national law, personal data, protection of privacy, transmission network








C_2017053EN.01001101.xml










20.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/11





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Kammarrätten i Stockholm and the Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) — Sweden, United Kingdom) — Tele2 Sverige AB v Post- och telestyrelsen (C-203/15), Secretary of State for the Home Department v Tom Watson, Peter Brice, Geoffrey Lewis (C-698/15)
(Joined Cases C-203/15 and C-698/15) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Electronic communications - Processing of personal data - Confidentiality of electronic communications - Protection - Directive 2002/58/EC - Articles 5, 6 and 9 and Article 15(1) - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Articles 7, 8 and 11 and Article 52(1) - National legislation - Providers of electronic communications services - Obligation relating to the general and indiscriminate retention of traffic and location data - National authorities - Access to data - No prior review by a court or independent administrative authority - Compatibility with EU law))
(2017/C 053/13)
Languages of the case: Swedish and English

Referring courts

Kammarrätten i Stockholm, the Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division)

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: Tele2 Sverige AB (C-203/15), Secretary of State for the Home Department (C-698/15)

Respondents: Post- och telestyrelsen (C-203/15), Tom Watson, Peter Brice, Geoffrey Lewis (C-698/15)

Interveners: Open Rights Group, Privacy International, The Law Society of England and Wales

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 15(1) of Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications), as amended by Directive 2009/136/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009, read in the light of Articles 7, 8 and 11 and Article 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which, for the purpose of fighting crime, provides for general and indiscriminate retention of all traffic and location data of all subscribers and registered users relating to all means of electronic communication.










2.


Article 15(1) of Directive 2002/58, as amended by Directive 2009/136, read in the light of Articles 7, 8 and 11 and Article 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation governing the protection and security of traffic and location data and, in particular, access of the competent national authorities to the retained data, where the objective pursued by that access, in the context of fighting crime, is not restricted solely to fighting serious crime, where access is not subject to prior review by a court or an independent administrative authority, and where there is no requirement that the data concerned should be retained within the European Union.










3.


The second question referred by the Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) is inadmissible.






(1)  OJ C 221, 6.7.2015


OJ C 98 14.3.2016.