CELEX: C2004/007/05
Language: en
Date: 2004-01-10 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 20 November 2003 in Case C-126/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour administrative d'appel de Lyon): Ministre de l'économie, des finances et de l'industrie v GEMO SA (State aid — System of financing a public carcass disposal service by a meat purchase tax — Interpretation of Article 92 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87 EC))

C 7/4                    EN                           Official Journal of the European Union                                              10.1.2004
on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing                       implementing the provisions of Directive 95/46 to areas not
of personal data and on the free movement of such data (OJ                           included in the scope thereof provided that no other provision of
1995 L 281, p. 31), the Court, composed of: P. Jann,                                 Community law precludes it.
President of the First Chamber, acting for the President,
C.W.A. Timmermans, C. Gulmann, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and
A. Rosas (Presidents of Chambers), D.A.O. Edward (Rappor-                     (1) OJ C 118 of 21.4.2001.
teur), J.-P. Puissochet, F. Macken and S. von Bahr, Judges;
A. Tizzano, Advocate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy
Registrar, has given a judgment on 6 November 2003, in
which it has ruled:
1.    The act of referring, on an internet page, to various persons and                         JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
      identifying them by name or by other means, for instance by
      giving their telephone number or information regarding their
      working conditions and hobbies, constitutes ‘the processing of                                     (Sixth Chamber)
      personal data wholly or partly by automatic means’ within the
      meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 95/46/EC of the European                                   of 20 November 2003
      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.                    in Case C-126/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
                                                                              the Cour administrative d’appel de Lyon): Ministre de
                                                                                l’économie, des finances et de l’industrie v GEMO SA (1)
2.    Such processing of personal data is not covered by any of the
      exceptions in Article 3(2) of Directive 95/46.                          (State aid — System of financing a public carcass disposal
                                                                              service by a meat purchase tax — Interpretation of Article 92
                                                                                 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87 EC))
3.    Reference to the fact that an individual has injured her foot and
      is on half-time on medical grounds constitutes personal data
                                                                                                           (2004/C 7/05)
      concerning health within the meaning of Article 8(1) of
      Directive 95/46.
                                                                                                    (Language of the case: French)
4.    There is no ‘transfer [of data] to a third country’ within the          (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
      meaning of Article 25 of Directive 95/46 where an individual                                 in the European Court Reports)
      in a Member State loads personal data onto an internet page
      which is stored on an internet site on which the page can be
      consulted and which is hosted by a natural or legal person who
      is established in that State or in another Member State, thereby
      making those data accessible to anyone who connects to the              In Case C-126/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
      internet, including people in a third country.                          by the Cour administrative d’appel de Lyon (France) for a
                                                                              preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
                                                                              court between Ministre de l’économie, des finances et de
                                                                              l’industrie and GEMO SA, on the interpretation of Article 92
5.    The provisions of Directive 95/46 do not, in themselves, bring          of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87 EC), the
      about a restriction which conflicts with the general principles of      Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: V. Skouris, acting
      freedom of expression or other freedoms and rights, which are           as President of the Sixth Chamber, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues
      applicable within the European Union and are enshrined inter            (Rapporteur), R. Schintgen, F. Macken and N. Colneric, Judges;
      alia in Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection        F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Adminis-
      of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed at Rome                 trator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 20 November
      on 4 November 1950. It is for the national authorities                  2003, in which it has ruled:
      and courts responsible for applying the national legislation
      implementing Directive 95/46 to ensure a fair balance between
      the rights and interests in question, including the fundamental         Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 87(1)
      rights protected by the Community legal order.                          EC), must be interpreted as meaning that a system such as that
                                                                              at issue in the main proceedings, which provides farmers and
                                                                              slaughterhouses with the free collection and disposal of animal
                                                                              carcasses and slaughterhouse waste, must be classified as State aid.
6.    Measures taken by the Member States to ensure the protection
      of personal data must be consistent both with the provisions of
      Directive 95/46 and with its objective of maintaining a balance
                                                                              (1) OJ C 134 of 5.5.2001.
      between freedom of movement of personal data and the
      protection of private life. However, nothing prevents a Member
      State from extending the scope of the national legislation