Skip to content
GDPR Art. 66 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.

Urgency procedure

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.

    In exceptional circumstances, where a supervisory authority concerned considers that there is an urgent need to act in order to protect the rights and freedoms of data subjects, it may, by way of derogation from the consistency mechanism referred to in Articles 63, 64 and 65 or the procedure referred to in Article 60, immediately adopt provisional measures intended to produce legal effects on its own territory with a specified period of validity which shall not exceed three months. The supervisory authority shall, without delay, communicate those measures and the reasons for adopting them to the other supervisory authorities concerned, to the Board and to the Commission.

  2. 2.

    Where a supervisory authority has taken a measure pursuant to paragraph 1 and considers that final measures need urgently be adopted, it may request an urgent opinion or an urgent binding decision from the Board, giving reasons for requesting such opinion or decision.

  3. 3.

    Any supervisory authority may request an urgent opinion or an urgent binding decision, as the case may be, from the Board where a competent supervisory authority has not taken an appropriate measure in a situation where there is an urgent need to act, in order to protect the rights and freedoms of data subjects, giving reasons for requesting such opinion or decision, including for the urgent need to act.

  4. 4.

    By derogation from Article 64(3) and Article 65(2), an urgent opinion or an urgent binding decision referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article shall be adopted within two weeks by simple majority of the members of the Board.

Enforcement

Cited in 1 fines totalling €800K

Top authority: 🇪🇺French Data Protection Authority (CNIL) (1) · median fine €800,000 · see all enforcement for Art. 66 →

Connections by provision

66(1) 8 Case Law 9 Guidance .md
Case Law 8
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 25 January 2018.#Maximilian Schrems v Facebook Ireland Limited.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Articles 15 and 16 — Jurisdiction in respect of consumer contracts — Definition of ‘consumer’ — Assignment between consumers of claims against the same trader or professional.#Case C-498/16. 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) 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 ¶9 Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 25 January 2018.#Maximilian Schrems v Facebook Ireland Limited.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Articles 15 and 16 — Jurisdiction in respect of consumer contracts — Definition of ‘consumer’ — Assignment between consumers of claims against the same trader or professional.#Case C-498/16. ¶17 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 ¶42 Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 8 November 2007.#The Bavarian Lager Co. Ltd v Commission of the European Communities.#Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to proceedings for failure to fulfil obligations - Decision refusing access - Protection of physical persons in relation to processing of personal data - Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 - Concept of private life.#Case T-194/04. ¶59 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 ¶52 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)
66(2) 3 Case Law 9 Guidance .md
Case Law 3
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 ¶59 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 ¶71 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
66(3) 6 Guidance .md
66(4) 2 Guidance .md