目录
GDPR > 第 78 條. 對監管機關提起有效司法救濟之權利
下载PDF

第 78 條 GDPR. 對監管機關提起有效司法救濟之權利

Article 78 GDPR. Right to an effective judicial remedy against a supervisory authority

1. 在不影響任何其他行政或非司法救濟之情況下,自然人或法人應 有權對監管機關就其所為具有法律拘束力之處分提起有效司法救 濟。

1. Without prejudice to any other administrative or non-judicial remedy, each natural or legal person shall have the right to an effective judicial remedy against a legally binding decision of a supervisory authority concerning them.

2. 在不影響任何其他行政或非司法救濟之情況下,如第 55 條及第 56 條所定之監管主管機關不處理申訴或未於三個月內依照第 77 條規定 通知申訴人申訴進展或結果者,資料主體應有權提起有效之司法救 濟。

2. Without prejudice to any other administrative or non-judicial remedy, each data subject shall have the right to a an effective judicial remedy where the supervisory authority which is competent pursuant to Articles 55 and 56 does not handle a complaint or does not inform the data subject within three months on the progress or outcome of the complaint lodged pursuant to Article 77.

连接数

3. 對監管機關之訴訟應提交於監管機關設立地之會員國法院。

3. Proceedings against a supervisory authority shall be brought before the courts of the Member State where the supervisory authority is established.

4. 在委員會於一致性機制中提出意見或做出決定以前,已對監管機 關所為處分提起訴訟者,監管機關應將該意見或決定轉交法院。

4. Where proceedings are brought against a decision of a supervisory authority which was preceded by an opinion or a decision of the Board in the consistency mechanism, the supervisory authority shall forward that opinion or decision to the court.

前言 发表评论
前言

(143) 任何自然人或法人皆有權利對委員會裁決依歐洲聯盟運作條 約第 263 條向歐盟法院提起裁決無效之訴。作為該等裁決之相對人, 如相關監管機關欲對之提出異議者,應依照歐洲聯盟運作條約第 263 條規定,於收受通知之兩個月內提起之。當委員會之裁決係直接且個 別涉及於控管者、處理者或申訴人,依歐洲聯盟運作條約第 263 條規定,後者得在裁決於委員會網站上公布之兩個月內,提起裁決無效之 訴。自然人或法人就監管機關對其作成有法律效果之裁決應得向該管 會員國法院尋求有效司法救濟,且不影響其依歐洲聯盟運作條約第 263 條所享有之權利。該裁決尤其涉及監管機關調查、矯正及授權之 權力行使,或申訴之不受理或駁回。然而,受有效司法救濟之權利並 不包含監管機關所採取之不具法律拘束力之措施,例如監管機關公告 之意見或提出之建議。對監管機關之訴訟應對監管機關設立地之會員 國法院提起之,且須依照該會員國程序法之規定進行。此等法院應行 使完整之審判權,包括應審理與爭議有關之一切事實上及法律上問 題。

(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.

當申訴遭監管機關不予受理或駁回時,申訴人得在該會員國之法院提 起訴訟。在本規則有關司法救濟適用之脈絡下,當該國法院認為有必 要對訟爭之裁決作出裁判時,其得請求歐盟法院就歐盟法(包括本規 則)之解釋做成初步裁決,或於有歐洲聯盟運作條約第 267 條之情形時,其應請求之。再者,當監管機關所執行之委員會裁決在該國法院 被提起訴訟,且該委員會裁決之效力存有爭議時,該國法院並無宣布 委員會之裁決無效之權力,但若其認該裁決無效時,應依照歐盟法院 對歐洲聯盟運作條約第 267 條所為之解釋將該有效性之疑義提交至 歐盟法院。然而,當委員會裁決有效性之爭議係由有機會對該裁決提 起無效訴訟之自然人或法人所提出,尤其是當該裁決直接且個別對其 生效,但其並未依歐洲聯盟運作條約第 263 條所定期間內提出者,該 國法院不得將該爭議提交至歐盟法院。

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.

发表评论