Skip to content
GDPR Recital 71 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 law. Contains: the full text of every article, recital and provision of this law. Everything links back to its source on overview.legal — legal information, not advice.

Recital 71 — automated decision making and profiling rights

In force — consolidated2016-05-04 · CELEX 02016R0679-20160504 · ELI ↗
Version history 2
  • 2016-05-04in force CELEX 02016R0679-20160504
  • 2016-04-27 CELEX 32016R0679

The data subject should have the right not to be subject to a decision, which may include a measure, evaluating personal aspects relating to him or her which is based solely on automated processing and which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her, such as automatic refusal of an online credit application or e-recruiting practices without any human intervention. Such processing includes ‘profiling’ that consists of any form of automated processing of personal data evaluating the personal aspects relating to a natural person, in particular to analyse or predict aspects concerning the data subject's performance at work, economic situation, health, personal preferences or interests, reliability or behaviour, location or movements, where it produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her. However, decision-making based on such processing, including profiling, should be allowed where expressly authorised by Union or Member State law to which the controller is subject, including for fraud and tax-evasion monitoring and prevention purposes conducted in accordance with the regulations, standards and recommendations of Union institutions or national oversight bodies and to ensure the security and reliability of a service provided by the controller, or necessary for the entering or performance of a contract between the data subject and a controller, or when the data subject has given his or her explicit consent. In any case, such processing should be subject to suitable safeguards, which should include specific information to the data subject and the right to obtain human intervention, to express his or her point of view, to obtain an explanation of the decision reached after such assessment and to challenge the decision. Such measure should not concern a child. In order to ensure fair and transparent processing in respect of the data subject, taking into account the specific circumstances and context in which the personal data are processed, the controller should use appropriate mathematical or statistical procedures for the profiling, implement technical and organisational measures appropriate to ensure, in particular, that factors which result in inaccuracies in personal data are corrected and the risk of errors is minimised, secure personal data in a manner that takes account of the potential risks involved for the interests and rights of the data subject and that prevents, inter alia, discriminatory effects on natural persons on the basis of racial or ethnic origin, political opinion, religion or beliefs, trade union membership, genetic or health status or sexual orientation, or that result in measures having such an effect. Automated decision-making and profiling based on special categories of personal data should be allowed only under specific conditions.

Related across sources

C-203/22 CK v Magistrat der Stadt Wien In Case C-203/22, the Court of Justice of the European Union interpreted Article 15(1)(h) of the GDPR in response to a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wien… CJEU ·First Chamber Feb 27, 2025 Profiling Automated Decision-Making Marketing
C-634/21 OQ v Land Hessen In Case C-634/21, the CJEU addressed a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wiesbaden concerning OQ's challenge against Land Hessen's refusal to order SCHUFA Holding AG… CJEU ·First Chamber Dec 7, 2023 Profiling Automated Decision-Making Marketing
W256 2227693-1 Austrian FAC: DPA rightly found loyalty program consent for profiling invalid under GDPR On 05.09.2019, the Austrian DPA (DSB) notified the controller of a customer loyalty program that they were initiating an ex officio investigation. The controller responded by… Federal Administrative Court Sep 28, 2023 Marketing Profiling Automated Decision-Making
15625/2026 Cass.Civ. - 15625/2026 Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS, the controller) is the Italian National Institute for Social Security. In 2021, the DPA fined the controller €300,000 for its… Supreme Court May 21, 2026 DPIA Privacy Impact Assessment Privacy by Design
C-169/23 Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság v UC In Case C-169/23, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Third Chamber) ruled on a preliminary reference from the Kúria (Hungary) concerning whether the Budapest Metropolitan… CJEU ·Third Chamber Nov 28, 2024 Personal Data Supervision Right of Access