Skip to content
GDPR Art. 64 EN
LLM context A cited markdown file you can paste into your AI assistant (ChatGPT, Claude, a RAG or project knowledge base) to ground it in this article. Contains: the article text, related recitals, cases citing it, enforcement stats and top fines, guidance, and related topics. Everything links back to its source on overview.legal — legal information, not advice.

Opinion of the Board

In force — consolidated2016-05-04 · CELEX 02016R0679-20160504 · ELI ↗
Version history 2
  • 2016-05-04in force CELEX 02016R0679-20160504
  • 2016-04-27 CELEX 32016R0679
  1. 1.

    The Board shall issue an opinion where a competent supervisory authority intends to adopt any of the measures below. To that end, the competent supervisory authority shall communicate the draft decision to the Board, when it:

    1. a)
      aims to adopt a list of the processing operations subject to the requirement for a data protection impact assessment pursuant to Article 35(4);
    2. b)
      concerns a matter pursuant to Article 40(7) whether a draft code of conduct or an amendment or extension to a code of conduct complies with this Regulation;
    3. c)
      aims to approve the criteria for accreditation of a body pursuant to Article 41(3) or a certification body pursuant to Article 43(3);
    4. d)
      aims to determine standard data protection clauses referred to in point (d) of Article 46(2) and in Article 28(8);
    5. e)
      aims to authorise contractual clauses referred to in point (a) of Article 46(3); or
    6. f)
      aims to approve binding corporate rules within the meaning of Article 47.
  2. 2.

    Any supervisory authority, the Chair of the Board or the Commission may request that any matter of general application or producing effects in more than one Member State be examined by the Board with a view to obtaining an opinion, in particular where a competent supervisory authority does not comply with the obligations for mutual assistance in accordance with Article 61 or for joint operations in accordance with Article 62.

  3. 3.

    In the cases referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Board shall issue an opinion on the matter submitted to it provided that it has not already issued an opinion on the same matter. That opinion shall be adopted within eight weeks by simple majority of the members of the Board. That period may be extended by a further six weeks, taking into account the complexity of the subject matter. Regarding the draft decision referred to in paragraph 1 circulated to the members of the Board in accordance with paragraph 5, a member which has not objected within a reasonable period indicated by the Chair, shall be deemed to be in agreement with the draft decision.

  4. 4.

    Supervisory authorities and the Commission shall, without undue delay, communicate by electronic means to the Board, using a standardised format any relevant information, including as the case may be a summary of the facts, the draft decision, the grounds which make the enactment of such measure necessary, and the views of other supervisory authorities concerned.

  5. 5.

    The Chair of the Board shall, without undue, delay inform by electronic means:

    1. a)
      the members of the Board and the Commission of any relevant information which has been communicated to it using a standardised format. The secretariat of the Board shall, where necessary, provide translations of relevant information; and
    2. b)
      the supervisory authority referred to, as the case may be, in paragraphs 1 and 2, and the Commission of the opinion and make it public.
  6. 6.

    The competent supervisory authority shall not adopt its draft decision referred to in paragraph 1 within the period referred to in paragraph 3.

  7. 7.

    The supervisory authority referred to in paragraph 1 shall take utmost account of the opinion of the Board and shall, within two weeks after receiving the opinion, communicate to the Chair of the Board by electronic means whether it will maintain or amend its draft decision and, if any, the amended draft decision, using a standardised format.

  8. 8.

    Where the supervisory authority concerned informs the Chair of the Board within the period referred to in paragraph 7 of this Article that it does not intend to follow the opinion of the Board, in whole or in part, providing the relevant grounds, Article 65(1) shall apply.

Connections by provision

64(1) 10 Case Law 77 Guidance 1 Literature .md
Case Law 10
Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland and Maximillian Schrems Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 10 February 2026.#WhatsApp Ireland Ltd v European Data Protection Board.#Appeal – Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data – Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Article 63 – Consistency mechanism – Article 65 – Dispute resolution by the European Data Protection Board – Binding decision – Action for annulment – First paragraph of Article 263 TFEU – Act open to challenge – Fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU – Condition that the Order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 April 2025.#Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd v European Data Protection Board.#Action for annulment – Protection of personal data – Opinion of the European Data Protection Board on valid consent in the context of ‘consent or pay’ models implemented by large online platforms – Article 64(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility – Liability – Damage – Causal link – Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law.#Case T Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 8 January 2025.#Thomas Bindl v European Commission.#Processing of personal data – Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies – Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 – Concept of ‘transfer of personal data to a third country’ – Transfer of data when visiting a website – EU Login – Action for annulment – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility – A ¶21 HvJ EU: Privacy Shield ongeldig verklaard (Schrems II) ¶21 Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 8 January 2025.#Thomas Bindl v European Commission.#Processing of personal data – Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies – Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 – Concept of ‘transfer of personal data to a third country’ – Transfer of data when visiting a website – EU Login – Action for annulment – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility – A ¶22 Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 8 January 2025.#Thomas Bindl v European Commission.#Processing of personal data – Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies – Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 – Concept of ‘transfer of personal data to a third country’ – Transfer of data when visiting a website – EU Login – Action for annulment – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility – A ¶14 Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 10 February 2026.#WhatsApp Ireland Ltd v European Data Protection Board.#Appeal – Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data – Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Article 63 – Consistency mechanism – Article 65 – Dispute resolution by the European Data Protection Board – Binding decision – Action for annulment – First paragraph of Article 263 TFEU – Act open to challenge – Fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU – Condition that the +2 more
64(1)(a) 1 Guidance .md
64(1)(b) 2 Guidance .md
64(1)(c) 23 Guidance .md
64(1)(d) 3 Guidance .md
64(1)(f) 134 Guidance .md
64(2) 16 Case Law 39 Guidance 1 Literature .md
Case Law 16
Meta Platforms v noyb Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 15 June 2021.#Facebook Ireland Ltd and Others v Gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Brussel.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Articles 7, 8 and 47 – Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Cross-border processing of personal data – ‘One-stop shop’ mechanism – Sincere and effecti Order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 April 2025.#Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd v European Data Protection Board.#Action for annulment – Protection of personal data – Opinion of the European Data Protection Board on valid consent in the context of ‘consent or pay’ models implemented by large online platforms – Article 64(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility – Liability – Damage – Causal link – Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law.#Case T Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland and Maximillian Schrems Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 26 April 2023.#Single Resolution Board v European Data Protection Supervisor.#Protection of personal data – Procedure for granting compensation to shareholders and creditors following the resolution of a bank – Decision of the EDPS in which it found that the SRB failed to fulfil its obligations concerning the processing of personal data – Article 15(1)(d) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 – Concept of personal data – Article 3(1) ¶29 Order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 April 2025.#Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd v European Data Protection Board.#Action for annulment – Protection of personal data – Opinion of the European Data Protection Board on valid consent in the context of ‘consent or pay’ models implemented by large online platforms – Article 64(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility – Liability – Damage – Causal link – Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law.#Case T ¶26 Order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 April 2025.#Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd v European Data Protection Board.#Action for annulment – Protection of personal data – Opinion of the European Data Protection Board on valid consent in the context of ‘consent or pay’ models implemented by large online platforms – Article 64(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility – Liability – Damage – Causal link – Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law.#Case T ¶21 Meta Platforms v noyb +8 more
64(3) 152 Guidance .md
64(4) 1 Guidance .md
64(5) 1 Guidance .md
64(5)(b) 81 Guidance .md
64(7) 3 Case Law 74 Guidance .md
Case Law 3
Order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 April 2025.#Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd v European Data Protection Board.#Action for annulment – Protection of personal data – Opinion of the European Data Protection Board on valid consent in the context of ‘consent or pay’ models implemented by large online platforms – Article 64(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility – Liability – Damage – Causal link – Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law.#Case T ¶15 Order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 April 2025.#Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd v European Data Protection Board.#Action for annulment – Protection of personal data – Opinion of the European Data Protection Board on valid consent in the context of ‘consent or pay’ models implemented by large online platforms – Article 64(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility – Liability – Damage – Causal link – Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law.#Case T ¶28 Order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 April 2025.#Meta Platforms Ireland Ltd v European Data Protection Board.#Action for annulment – Protection of personal data – Opinion of the European Data Protection Board on valid consent in the context of ‘consent or pay’ models implemented by large online platforms – Article 64(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Act not open to challenge – Inadmissibility – Liability – Damage – Causal link – Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law.#Case T
64(8) 2 Case Law 1 Guidance .md