Sagsøgere i hovedsagen:
Det belgiske datatilsyn.
Sagsøgte i hovedsagen:
Facebook Ireland Ltd, Facebook Inc og Facebook Belgien Bvba
Faktum i hovedsagen:
Sagens faktum er endnu ikke offentliggjort.
De præjudicielle spørgsmål:
Der er endnu ingen information tilgængelig på EU-Domstolens hjemmeside om, hvad sagen omhandler. Datatilsynet har indtil videre fået adgang til denne uofficiele oversættelse af spørgsmålene i sagen:
1. Are Articles 55 (1), 56-58 and 60-66 of Regulation No. 2016/679 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/EC1, read in conjunction with Articles 7, 8 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to be interpreted as meaning that a supervisory authority which, by virtue of national legislation adopted in implementation of Article 58 (5) of this Regulation, has the power to bring proceedings against infringements of this Regulation before a court of its Member State, cannot exercise this power in relation to cross-border processing if it is not the leading supervisory authority for such cross-border processing?
2. Does it make any difference in this respect if the controller of such cross-border processing does not have its main establishment in that Member State but has another establishment there?
3. Does it make any difference whether the national supervisory authority brings an action against the controller’s main establishment or against the establishment in its own Member State?
4. Does it make any difference in this regard if the national supervisory authority has already brought an action before the date of application of this Regulation (25 May 2018)?
5. In the event of an affirmative answer to the first question, does Article 58 (5) of the GDPR have direct effect, with the result that a national supervisory authority may rely on the aforementioned Article to initiate or continue legal proceedings against private parties even if Article 58 (5) of the GDPR has not been specifically transposed in the legislation of the Member States, notwithstanding the requirement to do so?
6. In the event of affirmative answers to the aforementioned questions, could the outcome of such procedures impede an opposite finding of the lead supervisory authority where the lead supervisory authority investigates the same or similar cross-border processing activities in accordance with the mechanism contained in Articles 56 and 60 of the GDPR?
Der er endnu ikke fastsat nogen dato for retsmøde i sagen, og datoen for dommens afsigelse kendes på nuværende tidspunkt heller ikke.
Link til sagen på EU-Domstolens hjemmeside