- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-46/23, Újpesti Polgármesteri Hivatal: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 31 January 2023 — Budapest Főváros IV. Kerület Újpest Önkormányzat Polgármesteri Hivatala v Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CN0046
62023CN0046
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
11.4.2023
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 127/21
(Case C-46/23, Újpesti Polgármesteri Hivatal)
(2023/C 127/25)
Language of the case: Hungarian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Budapest Főváros IV. Kerület Újpest Önkormányzat Polgármesteri Hivatala
Defendant: Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság
Questions referred
1.Must Article 58(2), in particular subparagraphs (c), (d) and (g), of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) be interpreted as meaning that the national supervisory authority, in exercise of its corrective powers, may order the data controller or processor to erase unlawfully processed personal data even in the absence of an express request by the data subject under Article 17(1) of the GDPR?
2.In the event that the answer to the first question is that the supervisory authority may order the data controller or processor to erase unlawfully processed personal data even in the absence of a request by the data subject, is that so irrespective of whether or not the personal data were obtained from the data subject?
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (OJ 2016 L 119, p. 1).
* * *
Language of the case: Hungarian.