# Patrick BREYER v. BUNDESREPUBLIK DEUTSCHLAND, (“BREYER”)

- Type: Case Law
- Source: CJEU
- Date: 2016-10-19
- Original: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62014CJ0582&ref=6142
- Canonical: https://overview.legal/posts/6142
- Topics: Personal Data, Consent, International Transfer, Law Enforcement

## Summary

Necessity: The applicant cannot be deemed to have proved the necessity of having the personal data at issue transferred where the only justification provided was to supplement his written defense before the Greek Examining Magistrate. Applicant did not provide any information or justification as to how the submission of the requested documents containing that data would affect the Greek proceedings, the risks to which he would be exposed in procedural terms, and the merits of his defense if the

## Sections (5)

### ¶69

In his initial letter requesting access to the documents, dated

### ¶70

Having regard to the above, the applicant cannot be deemed to have proved the necessity of having the personal data at issue transferred. It must be stated that, apart from referring to a purported obligation to prepare his written defence before the Greek Examining Magistrate before

> Topics: Personal Data

### ¶21

However, the court of appeal held that Mr Breyer’s action could not be upheld in other situations. If Mr Breyer does not reveal his identity during a consultation period, only the internet service provider could connect the IP address to an identified subscriber. However, in the hands of the Federal Republic of Germany, in its capacity as provider of online media services, the IP address is not personal data, even in combination with the date of the consultation period to which it relates, because the user of the websites concerned is not identifiable by that Member State.

> Topics: Identification, Personal Data, IP Address

### ¶26

If the dynamic IP addresses of Mr Breyer’s computer, together with the date of the relevant consultation period, were to be considered as constituting personal data, the referring court asks whether the storage of those IP addresses at the end of that consultation period is authorised by Article 7(f) of that directive.

> Topics: Personal Data · Applies: gdpr-art-7-en

### ¶29

The referring court asks whether that interpretation, which is the interpretation advocated by the court of appeal, is in accordance with Article 7(f) of Directive 95/46, having regard, in particular with the criteria laid down by the Court in paragraph 29 et seq. of the judgment of 24 November 2011, ASNEF and FECEMD ( C‑468/10 and C‑469/10 , EU:C:2011:777 ).

> Applies: gdpr-art-7-en

## Cited law provisions (2)

### GDPR — gdpr-art-7-par-1-en

Where processing is based on consent, the controller shall be able to demonstrate that the data subject has consented to processing of his or her personal data.

### GDPR — gdpr-art-7-en

Conditions for consent

---
Generated by overview.legal · https://overview.legal/posts/6142 · 2026-08-22