Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case in EU ruling on data privacy

Top court rules individuals have the 'right to be forgotten' and to ask for data to be removed

PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 13 May, 2014, 10:29pm
UPDATED : Tuesday, 13 May, 2014, 10:32pm

In a surprise ruling, the EU's top court said individuals had the right to ask US internet giant Google to delete personal data produced by its ubiquitous search engine.

Taking up a complaint concerning a Spanish citizen, the European Court of Justice said individuals had the right "to be forgotten" under certain circumstances when their personal data becomes outdated or inaccurate.

Specifically, this applies when such data "appear to be inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant, or excessive in relation to the purpose for which they were processed and in the light of the time that has elapsed".

This is a disappointing ruling for search engines and online publishers

This was based on the finding that under current EU data protection norms, "an internet search engine operator is responsible for the processing that it carries out of personal data".

Google said the ruling was a disappointment and at odds with an opinion last year delivered by one of the ECJ's top lawyers.

"This is a disappointing ruling for search engines and online publishers in general," the company said in a statement.

Google has previously argued that it is responsible only for finding the information. As long as this is correct and legal, it believes it should not be obliged to delete such data, which it argues amounts to censorship.

Last year, ECJ Advocate General Niilo Jaaskinen had argued that Google was not responsible for the data carried by websites appearing on its search engine and that EU citizens did not have a "right to be forgotten" under current law. That opinion had suggested the ECJ would rule accordingly in due course and was warmly welcomed by Google.

"We are glad to see it supports our long-held view that requiring search engines to suppress 'legitimate and legal information' would amount to censorship," the company said at the time.

The case centres on Spanish national Mario Costeja Gonzalez, who went to court because the personal details of his involvement in a debt recovery operation continued to appear on the online version of a Spanish newspaper long after the legal dispute had been resolved.

Spain's data protection agency, the AEPD, found that the newspaper was not at fault because the information was correct at the time it was published.