SERGEJS BUIVIDS v. THE AUGSTĀKĀ TIESA
Material scope: The recording of a video of police officers in a police station, while a statement is being made, and the publication of that video on a video website, on which users can send, watch and share videos, are matters which come within the scope of that directive. (¶¶ 31-32, 46-47)
How it connects
References
- SERGEJS BUIVIDS v. THE AUGSTĀKĀ TIESA
- SERGEJS BUIVIDS v. THE AUGSTĀKĀ TIESA
- Art. 2
- Art. 3
- Unabhängiges Landeszentrum für Datenschutz v Wirtschaftsakademie Schleswig-Holstein
- Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 20 October 2022.#Komisia za zashtita na lichnite danni and Tsentralna izbiratelna komisia v Koalitsia „Demokratichna Bulgaria - Obedinenie“.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven administrativen sad.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Protection of personal data – Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Scope – Article 2(2)(a) – Concept of ‘activity which falls outside the scope of Union law’ – National and European elections – Article 6(1)(e) – Lawful
Related across sources
Full text 5 paragraphs
According to the case-law of the Court, the image of a person recorded by a camera constitutes ‘personal data’ within the meaning of Article 2(a) of Directive 95/46 inasmuch as it makes it possible to identify the person concerned (see, to that effect, judgment of
December 2014, Ryneš, C‑212/13, EU:C:2014:2428, paragraph 22).
In the present case, it is apparent from the order for reference that it is possible to see and hear the police officers in the video in question, with the result that it must be held that those recorded images of persons constitute personal data within the meaning of Article 2(a) of Directive 95/46.
Furthermore, it is apparent from the Court’s case-law that the fact that information is provided as part of a professional activity does not mean that it cannot be characterised as ‘personal data’ (see, to that effect, judgment of
In the light of the foregoing, the answer to the first question is that Article 3 of Directive 95/46 must be interpreted as meaning that the recording of a video of police officers in a police station, while a statement is being made, and the publication of that video on a video website, on which users can send, watch and share videos, are matters which come within the scope of that directive.