Article 78
Right to an effective judicial remedy against a supervisory authority
(55) Whereas, if the controller fails to respect the rights of data subjects, national legislation must provide for a judicial remedy; whereas any damage which a person may suffer as a result of unlawful processing must be compensated for by the controller, who may be exempted from liability if he proves that he is not responsible for the damage, in particular in cases where he establishes fault on the part of the data subject or in case of force majeure; whereas sanctions must be imposed on any person, whether governed by private of public law, who fails to comply with the national measures taken under this Directive;
Regulation
Art. 78 1. Without prejudice to any other administrative or non-judicial remedy, each natural or legal person shall have the right to an effective judicial remedy against a legally binding decision of a supervisory authority concerning them. 2. Without prejudice to any other administrative or non-judicial remedy, each data subject shall have the right to a an effective judicial remedy where the supervisory authority which is competent pursuant to Articles 55 and 56 does not handle a complaint or does not inform the data subject within three months on the progress or outcome of the complaint lodged pursuant to Article 77. 3. Proceedings against a supervisory authority shall be brought before the courts of the Member State where the supervisory authority is established. 4. Where proceedings are brought against a decision of a supervisory authority which was preceded by an opinion or a decision of the Board in the consistency mechanism, the supervisory authority shall forward that opinion or decision to the court. |
Directive
Art. 28 (…) 3. (…) Decisions by the supervisory authority which give rise to complaints may be appealed against through the courts. |
Italy
|
Austria
All of the following in force until May 25, 2018: Rulings of the Data Protection Authority § 38 DSG 2000 (1) Controllers in the public sector always have a position as party in proceedings before the Data Protection Authority. (2) Rulings that permit transmission and committing of data according to section 13, shall be revoked once the legal or factual prerequisites under which the permit was issued, especially pursuant to a promulgation of the Federal Chancellor according to section 55 no longer apply. (3) Parties according to para. 1 may file a complaint with the federal administrative court. Procedure before the Federal Administrative Court § 39 DSG 2000 (1) The federal administrative court shall decide on complaints against rulings as well as complaints regarding the obligation to decide in due time regarding matters of this federal law by chamber. (2) The chamber shall consist of a chairman und one professionally experienced lay judge from the domain of the employers and from the domain of employees each. The professionally experienced lay judges shall be appointed on a proposal by the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber and the Federal Chamber of Labour. Appropriate arrangements shall be made so that a sufficient number of professionally experienced lay judges can be nominated at the right time. (3) The professionally experienced lay judges must have at least five years of relevant professional experience and special knowledge of data protection law. (4) The chairman shall transmit all documents relevant to the decision to the professionally experienced lay judges without delay, or, if this is impractical or absolutely necessary to safeguard the confidence of the documents, make them available in some other way. Appeal before the Supreme Administrative Court § 40 DSG 2000 An appeal before the Supreme Administrative Court may be brought by any party according to section 38 para. 1. |