Case Law · CJEU 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 document. Contains: this document’s text, its sections with their topics, and the full text of every law provision it applies. Everything links back to its source on overview.legal — legal information, not advice.
Peter Puškár v Finančné riaditeľstvo Slovenskej republiky and Kriminálny úrad finančnej správy
Summary
Admissibility of illegally obtained evidence: Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU precludes national court from rejecting, as evidence of an infringement of the protection of personal data, a list, such as the contested list, submitted by the data subject and containing personal data relating to him, “if that person had obtained that list without the consent, legally required, of the person responsible for processing that data, unless such rejection is laid down by national
How it connects
References
Related across sources
Guidance Guidelines 02/2024 on Article 48 GDPR Guidance Guidelines 8/2022 on identifying a controller or processor's lead supervisory authority Guidance Guidelines 9/2022 on personal data breach notification under GDPR Guidance Guidelines 03/2022 on Deceptive design patterns in social media platform interfaces: how to recognise and avoid them Guidance Guidelines 07/2022 on certification as a tool for transfers News An analysis of Dutch case law: what factors play a role in awarding (or not) and determining the extent of damages under the GDPR?
Full text
summary
Admissibility of illegally obtained evidence: Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU precludes national court from rejecting, as evidence of an infringement of the protection of personal data, a list, such as the contested list, submitted by the data subject and containing personal data relating to him, “if that person had obtained that list without the consent, legally required, of the person responsible for processing that data, unless such rejection is laid down by national legislation and respects both the essential content of the right to an effective remedy and the principle of proportionality.”
¶87 excerpt
As has been stated in paragraph 82 of the present judgment, rejecting a list, such as the contested list, as evidence of an infringement of the rights conferred by Directive 95/46, constitutes a limitation on the right to an effective remedy before a court within the meaning of Article 47 of the Charter.
Original document at the source eur-lex.europa.eu