Official Journal of the European Union

C 472/11

(Case C-129/21) (*)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Processing of personal data and protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector - Directive 2002/58/EC - Article 12 - Public telephone directories and directory enquiry services - Subscriber’s consent - Obligations of the provider of directories and of directory enquiry services - Regulation (EU) 2016/679 - Article 17 - Right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’) - Article 5(2) - Article 24 - Information obligations and responsibility of the controller)

(2022/C 472/13)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Proximus NV

Defendant: Gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit

Operative part of the judgment

1.Article 12(2) of Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector, as amended by Directive 2009/136/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009, read in conjunction with point (f) of the second paragraph of Article 2 of that directive and with Article 95 of 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 (General Data Protection Regulation),

must be interpreted as meaning that ‘consent’ within the meaning of Article 4(11) of that regulation is required from the subscriber of a telephone service operator in order for the personal data of that subscriber to be included in publicly available telephone directories and directory enquiry services published by providers other than that operator, and that that consent may be provided to that operator or to one of those providers.

2.Article 17 of Regulation 2016/679

must be interpreted as meaning that the request by a subscriber to have his or her personal data withdrawn from publicly available telephone directories and directory enquiry services constitutes making use of the ‘right to erasure’ within the meaning of that article.

3.Article 5(2) and Article 24 of Regulation 2016/679

must be interpreted as meaning that a national supervisory authority may require that the provider of publicly available telephone directories and directory enquiry services, as controller, take appropriate technical and organisational measures to inform third-party controllers, namely the telephone service operator that has communicated its subscriber’s personal data to that provider and the other providers of publicly available telephone directories and directory enquiry services to which that provider has itself supplied such data, of the withdrawal of the subscriber’s consent.

4.Article 17(2) of Regulation 2016/679

must be interpreted as not precluding a national supervisory authority from ordering a provider of publicly available telephone directories and directory enquiry services — which has been requested by the subscriber of a telephone service operator to cease disclosing personal data relating to him or her — to take ‘reasonable steps’, within the meaning of that provision, to inform search engine providers of that request for erasure of the data.

(*) Language of the case: Dutch

OJ C 189, 17.5.2021

ECLI:EU:C:2022:140