Navigacija
SUVP (GDPR) > Uvodna izjava 143
Prenos PDF

Uvodna izjava 143

Recital 143

(143) Katera koli fizična ali pravna oseba ima pravico, da pred Sodiščem pod pogoji iz člena 263 PDEU vloži ničnostno tožbo zoper odločitve odbora.

Zadevni nadzorni organi, ki želijo take odločitve izpodbijati, morajo kot njihovi naslovniki v skladu s členom 263 PDEU tožbo vložiti v dveh mesecih po tem, ko so bili o njih uradno obveščeni.

Kadar se odločitve odbora podatkov nanašajo neposredno in posamično na upravljavca, obdelovalca ali pritožnika, lahko ta vloži ničnostno tožbo zoper te odločitve, to pa mora v skladu s členom 263 PDEU storiti v dveh mesecih od objave teh odločitev na spletnem mestu odbora.

Brez poseganja v to pravico na podlagi člena 263 PDEU, bi morala imeti vsaka fizična ali pravna oseba na voljo učinkovito pravno sredstvo pred pristojnim nacionalnim sodiščem zoper odločitev nadzornega organa, ki ima pravne učinke za to osebo.

Taka odločitev se nanaša zlasti na izvajanje preiskovalnih pooblastil nadzornega organa, popravljalnih pooblastil in pooblastil v zvezi z dovoljenji ali na zavržene ali zavrnjene pritožbe.

Vendar pa pravica do učinkovitega pravnega sredstva ne zajema ukrepov nadzornih organov, ki niso pravno zavezujoči, kot so mnenja, ki jih izdajo nadzorni organi, ali njihovi nasveti.

Za postopke zoper nadzorni organ bi morala biti pristojna sodišča države članice, v kateri ima nadzorni organ sedež, izvajati pa bi se morali v skladu s postopkovnim pravom te države članice.

Ta sodišča bi morala izvajati polno pristojnost, ki bi morala vključevati pristojnost za preučitev vseh vprašanj, ki se nanašajo na dejstva in zakonodajo v zvezi z zadevnim sporom.

(143) Any natural or legal person has the right to bring an action for annulment of decisions of the Board before the Court of Justice under the conditions provided for in Article 263 TFEU.

As addressees of such decisions, the supervisory authorities concerned which wish to challenge them have to bring action within two months of being notified of them, in accordance with Article 263 TFEU.

Where decisions of the Board are of direct and individual concern to a controller, processor or complainant, the latter may bring an action for annulment against those decisions within two months of their publication on the website of the Board, in accordance with Article 263 TFEU.

Without prejudice to this right under Article 263 TFEU, each natural or legal person should have an effective judicial remedy before the competent national court against a decision of a supervisory authority which produces legal effects concerning that person.

Such a decision concerns in particular the exercise of investigative, corrective and authorisation powers by the supervisory authority or the dismissal or rejection of complaints.

However, the right to an effective judicial remedy does not encompass measures taken by supervisory authorities which are not legally binding, such as opinions issued by or advice provided by the supervisory authority.

Proceedings against a supervisory authority should be brought before the courts of the Member State where the supervisory authority is established and should be conducted in accordance with that Member State’s procedural law.

Those courts should exercise full jurisdiction, which should include jurisdiction to examine all questions of fact and law relevant to the dispute before them.

Kadar nadzorni organ zavrne ali zavrže pritožbo, lahko pritožnik sproži postopke na sodiščih v isti državi članici.

V okviru pravnih sredstev, ki se nanašajo na uporabo te uredbe, lahko nacionalna sodišča, ki obravnavajo odločitev o vprašanju, potrebno za to, da lahko izrečejo sodbo, od Sodišča zahtevajo predhodno odločanje v zvezi z razlago prava Unije, vključno s to uredbo, v primeru iz člena 267 PDEU pa ga morajo zahtevati.

Poleg tega, kadar se odločitev nadzornega organa, s katero se uveljavlja odločitev odbora, izpodbija pred nacionalnim sodiščem in je sporna veljavnost odločitve odbora, to nacionalno sodišče ni pristojno za razglasitev neveljavnosti odločitve odbora, temveč mora vprašanje veljavnosti, če meni, da je odločitev neveljavna, predložiti Sodišču v skladu s členom 267 PDEU, kakor ga razlaga Sodišče.

Po drugi strani pa nacionalno sodišče ne sme predložiti vprašanja veljavnosti odločitve odbora na zahtevo fizične ali pravne osebe, ki je imela možnost vložiti ničnostno tožbo zoper to odločitev, zlasti če se je ta neposredno in posamično nanašala nanjo, pa tega ni storila v roku iz člena 263 PDEU.

Where a complaint has been rejected or dismissed by a supervisory authority, the complainant may bring proceedings before the courts in the same Member State.

In the context of judicial remedies relating to the application of this Regulation, national courts which consider a decision on the question necessary to enable them to give judgment, may, or in the case provided for in Article 267 TFEU, must, request the Court of Justice to give a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Union law, including this Regulation.

Furthermore, where a decision of a supervisory authority implementing a decision of the Board is challenged before a national court and the validity of the decision of the Board is at issue, that national court does not have the power to declare the Board’s decision invalid but must refer the question of validity to the Court of Justice in accordance with Article 267 TFEU as interpreted by the Court of Justice, where it considers the decision invalid.

However, a national court may not refer a question on the validity of the decision of the Board at the request of a natural or legal person which had the opportunity to bring an action for annulment of that decision, in particular if it was directly and individually concerned by that decision, but had not done so within the period laid down in Article 263 TFEU.