On March 14, 2024, the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU”) ruled that EU supervisory authorities have the (corrective) power to order data controllers who have been found to process personal data unlawfully to erase such personal data, even if the data subjects have not requested the erasure.  (Case C‑46/23)

The CJEU ruled that supervisory authorities have this power under Article 58(2)(g) of the GDPR, which provides that authorities may order the erasure of personal data pursuant to Article 17.  The CJEU interpreted Article 17 of the GDPR (on the right to erasure) as imposing two “independent” obligations on data controllers, namely (i) to erase personal data when requested to do so by a data subject under the conditions set out in that Article, and (ii) to erase unlawfully processed personal data.  The CJEU decided that this interpretation was necessary to protect data subjects who were never informed of the unlawful processing.  The ECJ also ruled that, for the purposes of applying Article 17, it is irrelevant whether the controller collected the personal data directly from the data subjects or whether the data originated from another source.

*                                           *                                           *

Covington’s Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice monitors CJEU cases closely and reports on relevant Court decisions and Advocate General opinions.  If you have any questions about the GDPR rights, in particular the right of deletion, we would be happy to assist.

Photo of Kristof Van Quathem Kristof Van Quathem

Kristof Van Quathem advises clients on information technology matters and policy, with a focus on data protection, cybercrime and various EU data-related initiatives, such as the Data Act, the AI Act and EHDS.

Kristof has been specializing in this area for over twenty…

Kristof Van Quathem advises clients on information technology matters and policy, with a focus on data protection, cybercrime and various EU data-related initiatives, such as the Data Act, the AI Act and EHDS.

Kristof has been specializing in this area for over twenty years and developed particular experience in the life science and information technology sectors. He counsels clients on government affairs strategies concerning EU lawmaking and their compliance with applicable regulatory frameworks, and has represented clients in non-contentious and contentious matters before data protection authorities, national courts and the Court of the Justice of the EU.

Kristof is admitted to practice in Belgium.

Photo of Anna Sophia Oberschelp de Meneses Anna Sophia Oberschelp de Meneses

Anna Sophia Oberschelp de Meneses advises on EU data protection, cybersecurity, and consumer law. Her practice covers the full range of Europe’s digital regulatory framework, including GDPR, ePrivacy, NIS2, the Cyber Resilience Act, the AI Act, the Digital Services Act, the Data Act…

Anna Sophia Oberschelp de Meneses advises on EU data protection, cybersecurity, and consumer law. Her practice covers the full range of Europe’s digital regulatory framework, including GDPR, ePrivacy, NIS2, the Cyber Resilience Act, the AI Act, the Digital Services Act, the Data Act, the European Health Data Space, and EU consumer protection law, including product safety, product liability, and consumer rights legislation. She focuses on the operational side of compliance — helping clients design policies and processes, draft documentation, and build the internal frameworks needed to meet regulatory requirements in practice.

She also advises on contentious matters, drawing on experience managing investigations before national regulators and proceedings before national courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union. She works closely with Covington’s disputes teams on matters at the intersection of regulatory compliance and litigation.