Judgment of the Court of 7 May 2025 in Joined Cases E-1/24 and E-7/24 – TC and – AA (Anti-money laundering – Directive (EU) 2015/849 – Article 30(5)(c) – Access to beneficial ownership information – Directive (EU) 2018/843 – Validity of legislative acts – Principle of homogeneity – Fundamental rights – Respect for private life – Protection of personal data – Freedom of expression – National procedural autonomy – Principle of effectiveness – Regulation (EU) 2016/679)
Date: 2025-05-07
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: European Economic Area, Liechtenstein, access to information, disclosure of information, freedom of expression, money laundering, ownership, personal data, protection of privacy, terrorism financing








C_202504687EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/4687


21.8.2025







            JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
         
of 7 May 2025
         
in Joined Cases E-1/24 and E-7/24
TC
and
AA


(Anti-money laundering – Directive (EU) 2015/849 – Article 30(5)(c) – Access to beneficial ownership information – Directive (EU) 2018/843 – Validity of legislative acts – Principle of homogeneity – Fundamental rights – Respect for private life – Protection of personal data – Freedom of expression – National procedural autonomy – Principle of effectiveness – Regulation (EU) 2016/679)


(C/2025/4687)

In Joined Cases E-1/24 and E-7/24, TC and AA – REQUESTS to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by the Administrative Court of the Principality of Liechtenstein (Verwaltungsgerichtshof des Fürstentums Liechtenstein), concerning the right to access beneficial ownership information under Article 30 of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, the Court, composed of Páll Hreinsson, President, Bernd Hammermann and Michael Reiertsen (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave judgment on 7 May 2025, the operative part of which is as follows:
In Case E-7/24 AA:
Point (c) of the first subparagraph of Article 30(5) of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing must be interpreted as meaning that persons whose only connection with money laundering, terrorist financing and associated predicate offences consists in the fact that their financial interests were harmed by a predicate offence may have a legitimate interest to access beneficial ownership information within the meaning of that provision, which must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
Substantiation of a legitimate interest is both necessary and sufficient in order to access information contained in the beneficial ownership register. It is for the domestic legal system of each EEA State to lay down procedural rules governing access to the beneficial owner registers. Such procedural rules must, however, be in compliance with the principles of equivalence and effectiveness. The quality and quantity of evidence which is to be required must depend on what the national court deems necessary in light of the specific facts of each case.
Granting access to beneficial ownership information constitutes a proportionate interference with the fundamental rights of the identified beneficial owners insofar as the person requesting access can demonstrate a legitimate interest, in accordance with the Court’s interpretation, under point (c) of the first subparagraph of Article 30(5) of Directive (EU) 2015/849.
In Case E-1/24 TC:
Article 30(5) of Directive (EU) 2015/849 must be interpreted as neither requiring nor precluding national legislation that requires a person requesting access to beneficial ownership information to name the entity in respect of which information is sought. The right of access to beneficial ownership information in accordance with that provision must, however, be guaranteed and implemented in such a way as to reconcile it with the principle of effectiveness and the objective of the directive. A rigid formal requirement to always specify the legal entity, without allowing the competent authority to consider the specific circumstances of the case, is liable to make the exercise of the right to access beneficial ownership information excessively difficult.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4687/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)