GDPR Art. 78 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.

Right to an effective judicial remedy against a supervisory authority

Supervision Supervisory Authorities
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.

    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.

    Supervision Supervisory Authorities 60
  2. 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.

    Supervision Supervisory Authorities Personal Data 2
  3. 3.

    Proceedings against a supervisory authority shall be brought before the courts of the Member State where the supervisory authority is established.

    Supervision Supervisory Authorities 4
  4. 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.

    Supervision Supervisory Authorities 4

Connections by provision

78(1) 57 Case Law 2 Guidance 1 Literature .md
Case Law 57
VG Ansbach: Lawyer not required to redact client data when submitting files to court Facebook Ireland Ltd and Others v Gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit Meta Platforms Ireland Limited v Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände - Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband eV Österreichische Datenschutzbehörde v F R ND v DR SO OQ v Land Hessen UF and AB v Land Hessen +49 more
Guidance 2
Guidelines 02/2022 on the application of Article 60 GDPR ¶213 Guidelines 02/2022 on the application of Article 60 GDPR
Literature 1
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it? Ten improvements for the upcoming tenth anniversary of the General Data Protection Regulation
78(2) 2 Case Law .md
Case Law 2
VG Osnabrück - 7 A 170/24 ¶11 VG Osnabrück - 7 A 170/24
78(3) 2 Case Law 2 Guidance .md
Case Law 2
Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber), 12 December 2013.#X.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te ’s-Hertogenbosch.#Protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data — Directive 95/46/EC — Conditions for exercising a right of access — Levying of excessive fees.#Case C‑486/12. ¶4 Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber), 12 December 2013.#X.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te ’s-Hertogenbosch.#Protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data — Directive 95/46/EC — Conditions for exercising a right of access — Levying of excessive fees.#Case C‑486/12.
Guidance 2
Guidelines 02/2022 on the application of Article 60 GDPR ¶226 Guidelines 02/2022 on the application of Article 60 GDPR
78(4) 2 Case Law 2 Guidance .md
Case Law 2
WhatsApp Ireland Ltd v European Data Protection Board ¶32 WhatsApp Ireland Ltd v European Data Protection Board
Guidance 2
Guidelines 03/2021 on the application of Article 65(1)(a) GDPR ¶86 Guidelines 03/2021 on the application of Article 65(1)(a) GDPR