Case C-487/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Austria) lodged on 9 August 2021 — F.F.
Date: 2021-08-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: data protection, data-processing law, electronic document, medical examination, natural person, personal data, protection of communications








C_2021431EN.01000802.xml










25.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/8






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Austria) lodged on 9 August 2021 — F.F.
(Case C-487/21)
(2021/C 431/07)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: F.F.

Other parties: Österreichische Datenschutzbehörde, CRIF GmbH

Questions referred







1.


Is the term ‘copy’ in Article 15(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (1) (‘the GDPR’) to be interpreted as meaning a photocopy, a facsimile or an electronic copy of an (electronic) item of data, or does it also cover an ‘Abschrift’, a ‘double’ (‘duplicata’) or a ‘transcript’, in line with the understanding of the term in German, French and English dictionaries?










2.


Is the first sentence of Article 15(3) of the GDPR, according to which ‘the controller shall provide a copy of the personal data undergoing processing’, to be interpreted as affording a general right for a data subject to obtain a copy of — also — entire documents in which the personal data of that data subject are processed, or to receive a copy of a database extract if the personal data are processed in such a database, or does the data subject have a right — only — to an exact reproduction of the personal data about which information is to be provided pursuant to Article 15(1) of the GDPR?










3.


In the event that Question 2 is answered to the effect that the data subject has a right only to an exact reproduction of the personal data about which information is to be provided pursuant to Article 15(1) of the GDPR, is the first sentence of Article 15(3) of the GDPR to be interpreted as meaning that, depending on the nature of the data processed (for example in relation to the diagnoses, examination results and assessments mentioned in recital 63 or documents in relation to an examination within the meaning of the judgment of the Court of Justice of 20 December 2017, Nowak (2)) and the transparency requirement in Article 12(1) of the GDPR, it may nevertheless be necessary in individual cases to make text passages or entire documents available to the data subject?










4.


Is the term ‘information’ which, pursuant to the third sentence of Article 15(3) of the GDPR, ‘where the data subject makes the request by electronic means, and unless otherwise requested by the data subject, […] shall be provided in a commonly used electronic form’, to be interpreted as referring solely to the ‘personal data undergoing processing’ mentioned in the first sentence of Article 15(3) of the GDPR?






a.


If Question 4 is answered in the negative: Is the term ‘information’ which, pursuant to the third sentence of Article 15(3) of the GDPR, ‘where the data subject makes the request by electronic means, and unless otherwise requested by the data subject, […] shall be provided in a commonly used electronic form’ to be interpreted as also referring to the information pursuant to Article 15(1)(a) to (h) of the GDPR?










b.


If Question 4a also is answered in the negative: Is the term ‘information’ which, pursuant to the third sentence of Article 15(3) of the GDPR, ‘where the data subject makes the request by electronic means, and unless otherwise requested by the data subject, […] shall be provided in a commonly used electronic form’ to be interpreted as referring, beyond the ‘personal data undergoing processing’ and the information pursuant to Article 15(1)(a) to (h) of the GDPR, to associated metadata, for example?










(1)  Regulation 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).

(2)  C-434/16, EU:C:2017:994.