CELEX: 62017CA0345
Language: en
Date: 2019-02-14 00:00:00
Title: Case C-345/17: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 14 February 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa — Latvia) — Proceedings brought by Sergejs Buivids (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Processing of personal data — Directive 95/46/EC — Article 3 — Scope — Video recording of police officers carrying out procedural measures in a police station — Publication on a video website — Article 9 — Processing of personal data solely for journalistic purposes — Meaning — Freedom of expression — Protection of privacy)

8.4.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 131/6
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 14 February 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa — Latvia) — Proceedings brought by Sergejs Buivids
      (Case C-345/17) (1)
      
      (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Processing of personal data - Directive 95/46/EC - Article 3 - Scope - Video recording of police officers carrying out procedural measures in a police station - Publication on a video website - Article 9 - Processing of personal data solely for journalistic purposes - Meaning - Freedom of expression - Protection of privacy)
      (2019/C 131/06)
      Language of the case: Latvian
      
         Referring court
      
      Augstākā tiesa
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      Sergejs Buivids
      
         Other party: Datu valsts inspekcija
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Article 3 of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data must be interpreted as meaning that the recording of a video of police officers in a police station, while a statement is being made, and the publication of that video on a video website, on which users can send, watch and share videos, are matters which come within the scope of that directive.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Article 9 of Directive 95/46 must be interpreted as meaning that factual circumstances such as those of the case in the main proceedings, that is to say, the video recording of police officers in a police station, while a statement is being made, and the publication of that recorded video on a video website, on which users can send, watch and share videos, may constitute a processing of personal data solely for journalistic purposes, within the meaning of that provision, in so far as it is apparent from that video that the sole object of that recording and publication thereof is the disclosure of information, opinions or ideas to the public, this being a matter which it is for the referring court to determine.
               
            
         (1)  OJ C 277, 21.8.2017.