Right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority
(7) Those developments require a strong and more coherent data protection framework in the Union, backed by strong enforcement, given the importance of creating the trust that will allow the digital economy to develop across the internal market. Natural persons should have control of their own personal data. Legal and practical certainty for natural persons, economic operators and public authorities should be enhanced.
(141) Every data subject should have the right to lodge a complaint with a single supervisory authority, in particular in the Member State of his or her habitual residence, and the right to an effective judicial remedy in accordance with Article 47 of the Charter if the data subject considers that his or her rights under this Regulation are infringed or where the supervisory authority does not act on a complaint, partially or wholly rejects or dismisses a complaint or does not act where such action is necessary to protect the rights of the data subject. The investigation following a complaint should be carried out, subject to judicial review, to the extent that is appropriate in the specific case. The supervisory authority should inform the data subject of the progress and the outcome of the complaint within a reasonable period. If the case requires further investigation or coordination with another supervisory authority, intermediate information should be given to the data subject. In order to facilitate the submission of complaints, each supervisory authority should take measures such as providing a complaint submission form which can also be completed electronically, without excluding other means of communication.
(142) Where a data subject considers that his or her rights under this Regulation are infringed, he or she should have the right to mandate a not-for-profit body, organisation or association which is constituted in accordance with the law of a Member State, has statutory objectives which are in the public interest and is active in the field of the protection of personal data to lodge a complaint on his or her behalf with a supervisory authority, exercise the right to a judicial remedy on behalf of data subjects or, if provided for in Member State law, exercise the right to receive compensation on behalf of data subjects. A Member State may provide for such a body, organisation or association to have the right to lodge a complaint in that Member State, independently of a data subject's mandate, and the right to an effective judicial remedy where it has reasons to consider that the rights of a data subject have been infringed as a result of the processing of personal data which infringes this Regulation. That body, organisation or association may not be allowed to claim compensation on a data subject's behalf independently of the data subject's mandate.
(143) Any natural or legal person has the right to bring an action for annulment of decisions of the Board before the Court of Justice under the conditions provided for in Article 263 TFEU. As addressees of such decisions, the supervisory authorities concerned which wish to challenge them have to bring action within two months of being notified of them, in accordance with Article 263 TFEU. Where decisions of the Board are of direct and individual concern to a controller, processor or complainant, the latter may bring an action for annulment against those decisions within two months of their publication on the website of the Board, in accordance with Article 263 TFEU. Without prejudice to this right under Article 263 TFEU, each natural or legal person should have an effective judicial remedy before the competent national court against a decision of a supervisory authority which produces legal effects concerning that person. Such a decision concerns in particular the exercise of investigative, corrective and authorisation powers by the supervisory authority or the dismissal or rejection of complaints. However, the right to an effective judicial remedy does not encompass measures taken by supervisory authorities which are not legally binding, such as opinions issued by or advice provided by the supervisory authority. Proceedings against a supervisory authority should be brought before the courts of the Member State where the supervisory authority is established and should be conducted in accordance with that Member State's procedural law. Those courts should exercise full jurisdiction, which should include jurisdiction to examine all questions of fact and law relevant to the dispute before them.
Where a complaint has been rejected or dismissed by a supervisory authority, the complainant may bring proceedings before the courts in the same Member State. In the context of judicial remedies relating to the application of this Regulation, national courts which consider a decision on the question necessary to enable them to give judgment, may, or in the case provided for in Article 267 TFEU, must, request the Court of Justice to give a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Union law, including this Regulation. Furthermore, where a decision of a supervisory authority implementing a decision of the Board is challenged before a national court and the validity of the decision of the Board is at issue, that national court does not have the power to declare the Board's decision invalid but must refer the question of validity to the Court of Justice in accordance with Article 267 TFEU as interpreted by the Court of Justice, where it considers the decision invalid. However, a national court may not refer a question on the validity of the decision of the Board at the request of a natural or legal person which had the opportunity to bring an action for annulment of that decision, in particular if it was directly and individually concerned by that decision, but had not done so within the period laid down in Article 263 TFEU.
(144) Where a court seized of proceedings against a decision by a supervisory authority has reason to believe that proceedings concerning the same processing, such as the same subject matter as regards processing by the same controller or processor, or the same cause of action, are brought before a competent court in another Member State, it should contact that court in order to confirm the existence of such related proceedings. If related proceedings are pending before a court in another Member State, any court other than the court first seized may stay its proceedings or may, on request of one of the parties, decline jurisdiction in favour of the court first seized if that court has jurisdiction over the proceedings in question and its law permits the consolidation of such related proceedings. Proceedings are deemed to be related where they are so closely connected that it is expedient to hear and determine them together in order to avoid the risk of irreconcilable judgments resulting from separate proceedings.
(145) For proceedings against a controller or processor, the plaintiff should have the choice to bring the action before the courts of the Member States where the controller or processor has an establishment or where the data subject resides, unless the controller is a public authority of a Member State acting in the exercise of its public powers.
There is no recital in the Directive related to article 77.
Like the Directive, Article 77 of the Regulation enables any person concerned by data processing to lodge a complaint with a supervising authority if the data subject considers that the processing of personal data relating to him or her infringes this Regulation. Any infringement of the Regulation may therefore justify such a complaint.
In its first draft, the second paragraph of Article 77 specified also the organizations entitled to lodge a complaint on behalf of the data subject, even irrespective of any claim of the data subject, in case of personal data breach. However, this element was not retained in the final version of the text.
Which supervisory authority a data subject may report to for determination is not strictly specified. According to paragraph 1, data subject shall have the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority competent of his or her habitual residence, place of work or place of the alleged infringement.
The supervisory authority receiving the lodged complaint shall inform the complainant on the progress and the outcome of the complaint including the possibility of a judicial remedy pursuant to Article 78 of the Regulation (paragraph 2).
The Directive already required Member States to implement a procedure for lodging a complaint with the supervisory authority. Thus any person or an association representing that person may lodge a complaint concerning the protection of his or her rights and freedoms in regard to the processing of personal data. This may in particular consist of a request for verification of the lawfulness of processing. Pursuant to Article 28 (4), the person concerned shall be informed of the outcome of the claim or that a check has taken place.
In countries where the authority had no decision-making power, an increase in complaints may be expected, as this situation will lead to a decision likely to be appealed. The problem is then to determine what will be the procedure before the national authority which should not be overly complicated and/or costly as this may discourage the data subject from pursuing a complaint.
C‑132/21 (12 January 2023), Budapesti Elektromos Művek
Article 77(1), Article 78(1) and Article 79(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 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), read in the light of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
must be interpreted as permitting the remedies provided for in Article 77(1) and Article 78(1) of that regulation, on the one hand, and Article 79(1) thereof, on the other, to be exercised concurrently with and independently of each other. It is for the Member States, in accordance with the principle of procedural autonomy, to lay down detailed rules as regards the relationship between those remedies in order to ensure the effective protection of the rights guaranteed by that regulation and the consistent and homogeneous application of its provisions, as well as the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal as referred to in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.Retour au sommaire Retour au sommaire
1. Without prejudice to any other administrative or judicial remedy, every data subject shall have the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority, in particular in the Member State of his or her habitual residence, place of work or place of the alleged infringement if the data subject considers that the processing of personal data relating to him or her infringes this Regulation.
2. The supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged shall inform the complainant on the progress and the outcome of the complaint including the possibility of a judicial remedy pursuant to Article 78.
1st proposal close
1. Without prejudice to any other administrative or judicial remedy, every data subject shall have the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority in any Member State if they consider that the processing of personal data relating to them does not comply with this Regulation.
2. Any body, organisation or association which aims to protect data subjects’ rights and interests concerning the protection of their personal data and has been properly constituted according to the law of a Member State shall have the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority in any Member State on behalf of one or more data subjects if it considers that a data subject’s rights under this Regulation have been infringed as a result of the processing of personal data.
3. Independently of a data subject's complaint, any body, organisation or association referred to in paragraph 2 shall have the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority in any Member State, if it considers that a personal data breach has occurred.
2nd proposal close
1. Without prejudice to any other administrative or judicial remedy, every data subject shall have the right to lodge a complaint with a single supervisory authority, in particular in the Member State of his or her habitual residence, place of work or place of the alleged infringement, if the data subject considers that the processing of personal data relating to him or her does not comply with this Regulation.
5. The supervisory authority to which the complaint has been lodged shall inform the complainant on the progress and the outcome of the complaint including the possibility of a judicial remedy pursuant to Article 74 (…).
4. Each supervisory authority shall hear claims lodged by any person, or by an association representing that person, concerning the protection of his rights and freedoms in regard to the processing of personal data. The person concerned shall be informed of the outcome of the claim.
Each supervisory authority shall, in particular, hear claims for checks on the lawfulness of data processing lodged by any person when the national provisions adopted pursuant to Article 13 of this Directive apply. The person shall at any rate be informed that a check has taken place.
60. § * (1) A személyes adatok védelméhez való jog érvényesülése érdekében a Hatóság az érintett erre irányuló kérelmére adatvédelmi hatósági eljárást indít és hivatalból adatvédelmi hatósági eljárást indíthat.
(2) Az adatvédelmi hatósági eljárás megindítása iránti kérelem az általános adatvédelmi rendelet 77. cikk (1) bekezdésében, valamint a 22. § b) pontjában meghatározott esetben nyújtható be.
(3) A Hatóság hivatalból adatvédelmi hatósági eljárást indít, ha
a) vizsgálata alapján megállapítja, hogy a személyes adatok kezelésével kapcsolatban jogsérelem következett be vagy annak közvetlen veszélye áll fenn, és az 56. § szerinti felszólítás vagy ajánlás alapján a jogsérelem orvoslására, illetve a jogsérelem közvetlen veszélyének megszüntetésére a Hatóság által meghatározott határidőben nem került sor,
b) vizsgálata alapján megállapítja, hogy a személyes adatok kezelésével kapcsolatban jogsérelem következett be vagy annak közvetlen veszélye áll fenn és az általános adatvédelmi rendelet rendelkezései alapján bírság kiszabásának van helye.
(4) Ha az adatvédelmi hatósági eljárást a Hatóság bejelentésen alapuló vizsgálata előzte meg, a bejelentőt az adatvédelmi hatósági eljárás megindításáról, illetve befejezéséről a Hatóság értesíti.
(5) A (2) bekezdésben meghatározott esetben a kérelem az általános közigazgatási rendtartásról szóló törvényben meghatározottakon túl tartalmazza
a) a feltételezett jogsértés megjelölését,
b) a feltételezett jogsértést megvalósító konkrét magatartás vagy állapot leírását,
c) a feltételezett jogsértést megvalósító adatkezelő, illetve adatfeldolgozó azonosításához szükséges, a kérelmező rendelkezésére álló adatokat,
d) a feltételezett jogsértéssel kapcsolatos állításokat alátámasztó tényeket és azok bizonyítékait, továbbá
e) a megjelölt jogsértés orvoslása iránti döntésre vonatkozó határozott kérelmet.
(6) Az adatvédelmi hatósági eljárásban a kérelmezőt költségmentesség illeti meg, a Hatóság előlegezi az olyan eljárási költséget, amelynek előlegezése a kérelmezőt terhelné.
60/A. § * (1) Az adatvédelmi hatósági eljárásban az ügyintézési határidő százhúsz nap.
(2) A Hatóság az adatvédelmi hatósági eljárást az általános adatvédelmi rendelet
a) 60. cikk (3)-(5) bekezdésben meghatározott együttműködési eljárás és
b) 63-66. cikkében meghatározott egységességi mechanizmus
alkalmazásának időtartamára felfüggeszti, azzal, hogy a Hatóság a felfüggesztés időtartama alatt is elvégzi az együttműködési eljárásban és az egységességi mechanizmusban szükséges eljárási cselekményeket.
(3) Ha a Hatóság a kérelemre indult eljárás bármely szakaszában megállapítja joghatóságának hiányát, a kérelmet visszautasítja vagy az eljárást megszünteti.
(6) Ha a Hatóság az adatvédelmi hatósági eljárást a kérelem benyújtását követő kilencven napon belül nem szüntette meg vagy az ügy érdemében nem döntött, a kérelmezőt értesíti az értesítés időpontjáig megtett eljárási cselekményekről.
Old law close
Investigation by the Authority
§ 52 Data Protection Act
(1) Any person shall have the right to notify the Authority and request an investigation alleging an infringement relating to his or her personal data or concerning the exercise of the rights of access to public information or information of public interest, or if there is imminent danger of such infringement.