(AGENPARL) – gio 12 gennaio 2023 Dear All,
Please find attached press release in respect of Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-132/21 | Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság
The administrative and civil remedies provided for by the General Data Protection Regulation may be exercised concurrently with and independently of each other
It is for the Member States to ensure that the parallel exercise of those remedies does not prejudice the consistent and homogeneous application of that regulation
Kind regards,
Vittorio Quartetti
Trainee
Press and Information Unit
Communication Department
[cid:image002.jpg@01D5E282.B6DDC230]
[logo-en]
Rue du Fort Niedergrünewald
L-2925 Luxembourg
[curia.europa.eu](https://www.curia.europa.eu/)

Testo Allegato:
Communications Directorate

Press and Information Unit

curia.europa.eu

PRESS RELEASE No

3
/23

Luxembourg, 12

January 2023

Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C
–
132/21 | Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság
Hatóság

The administrative and civil
remedies

provided for by the General Data
Protection Regulation may be

exercised concurrently

with

and
independently of each other

It is for the Member States to ensure that the parallel exercise of those
remedies

does not prejudice the
consistent and homogeneous application of that regulation

In April 2019, BE attended the
of

which he is a shareholder and, at that
time, put questions to the members of the board of directors and to other participants. Subsequently, he asked the
company to send him the sound recording made at the gen
him only the excerpts from that recording which reproduced his own contributions, excluding those of the other
participants, even though their contributions constituted answers to questions put by him.

BE then asked the Hungarian supervisory authority responsible under the General Data Protection Regulation
(GDPR) to order the company concerned to send him the recording in question. That authority having refused his
request, BE brought an administrative
appeal against the decision refusing that request before the Budapest High
Court. At the same time, he also brought proceedings before the Hungarian civil courts against the decision of the
company in question to refuse him access. Those proceedings were b
ased on a provision of the GDPR conferring on
each data subject the right to an effective judicial remedy where he or she considers that his or her rights under that
regulation have been infringed. The administrative appeal proceedings are still ongoing, b
ut the Hungarian civil
courts seised in respect of the
other

a

judgment

which has become final
, already found
that the company referred to above had infringed BEâ??s right of access to his personal data.

The Budapest High Court as
decision of the national supervisory authority, it is bound by the final judgment of the civil courts concerning the
same facts and the same alleged infringement, by the com
pany concerned, of the GDPR. In addition, given that the
parallel exercise of administrative and civil
remedies

could give rise to contradictory decisions, the Hungarian court
remedies

might take priority over the ot
her.

The Court of Justice recalls that the GDPR offers different remedies to persons claiming that its provisions have been
infringed, it being understood that each of those remedies must be capable of being exercised â??without prejudiceâ?? to
the others. Thu
s,
it does not provide for any priority or exclusive competence or jurisdiction or for any rule of
precedence

is an infringement of the rights concerned
. Consequently, the Court notes that
the administrative and civil
remedies

provided for by the GDPR may be exercised concurrently
with
and independently of each other
.

As regards the risk of contradictory decisions by the national administrative and judici
al authorities concerned, the
Court emphasises that
it is for each Member State to ensure
, through adopting the procedural rules necessary

Communications Directorate

Press and Information Unit

curia.europa.eu

Stay Connected!

for that purpose and in exercising its procedural autonomy,
that the concurrent and independent
remedies

provided for

by the GDPR do not call into question

th
e effectiveness and effective protection

of the rights
guaranteed by that regulation,
the consistent and homogeneous application of its provisions
, or, lastly, the right
to an effective remedy before a court or trib
unal.

NOTE:

A reference for a preliminary ruling allows the courts and tribunals of the Member States, in disputes which
Union law or the validit
y of a European Union act. The Court of Justice does not decide the dispute itself. It is for the
national court or tribunal to dispose of the case in accordance with the Courtâ??s de
cision,
which is similarly binding on
other national courts or tribunals be
fore which a similar issue is raised.

Unofficial document for media use, not binding on the Court of Justice.

The
full text

of the judgment is published on the CURIA website on the day

of delivery.

Press contact
:

Jacques René Zammit
â??
(+352) 4
303

335
5.