In the matter of the General Data Protection Regulation
DPC Complaint Reference:
IMI Complaint Reference Number:
In the matter of a complaint, lodged by with Commission Nationale de
l'Informatique et des Libertés pursuant to Article 77 of the General Data Protection Regulation,
concerning Yahoo EMEA Limited
Record of Amicable Resolution of the complaint and its consequent withdrawal pursuant to
Section 109(3) of the Data Protection Act, 2018
Further to the requirements of EDPB Guidelines 06/2022 on the practical implementation of
amicable settlements Version 2.0 (adopted on 12 May 2022)
RECORD OF AMICABLE RESOLUTION FOR THE
PURPOSE OF EDPB GUIDELINES 06/2022 ON THE
PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF AMICABLE
SETTLEMENTS VERSION 2.0, ADOPTED 12 MAY 2022
Dated the 19th day of March 2024
Data Protection Commission
21 Fitzwilliam Square South
Dublin 2, Ireland
1
Background
1. On 4 May 2022, (“the Data Subject”) lodged a complaint pursuant to Article 77
GDPR with Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés (“the Recipient SA”)
concerning Yahoo EMEA Limited (“the Respondent”).
2. In circumstances where the Data Protection Commission (“the DPC”) was deemed to be the
competent authority for the purpose of Article 56(1) GDPR, the Recipient SA transferred the
complaint to the DPC on 6 January 2023.
The Complaint
3. The details of the complaint were as follows:
a. On 19 April 2022, the Data Subject contacted the Respondent requesting the delisting
of four URLs, the content of which detailed events in 2013 leading to a conviction
against the Data Subject in October 2019.
b. The Respondent refused to delist on the grounds that, in its view, the request did not
meet the relevant criteria set out by the European Court of Justice.
c. The Data Subject was dissatisfied with the Respondent’s response and lodged a
complaint with the Recipient SA.
Action taken by the DPC
4. The DPC, pursuant to Section 109(4) of the Data Protection Act, 2018 (“the 2018 Act”), is
required, as a preliminary matter, to assess the likelihood of the parties to the complaint
reaching, within a reasonable time, an amicable resolution of the subject-matter of the
complaint. Where the DPC considers that there is a reasonable likelihood of such an amicable
resolution being concluded between the parties, it is empowered, by Section 109(2) of the
2018 Act, to take such steps as it considers appropriate to arrange or facilitate such an
amicable resolution.
5. Following a preliminary examination of the material referred to it by the Recipient SA, the DPC
considered that there was a reasonable likelihood of the parties concerned reaching, within a
reasonable time, an amicable resolution of the subject matter of the complaint. The DPC’s
experience is that complaints of this nature are particularly suitable for amicable resolution in
circumstances where there is an obvious solution to the dispute, if the respondent is willing
to engage in the process. In this regard, the DPC had regard to:
a. The relationship between the Data Subject and Respondent (being, in this case, an
individual identified in search results and the service provider responsible for
providing those search results); and
2
b. The nature of the complaint (in this case, an unsuccessful attempt by the Data Subject
to exercise their data subject rights).
6. While not relevant to the assessment that the DPC is required to carry out pursuant to Section
109(4) of the 2018 Act, the DPC also had regard to EDPB Guidelines 06/2022 on the practical
implementation of amicable settlements Version 2.0, adopted on 12 May 2022 (“Document
06/2022”), and considered that:
a. the possible conclusion of the complaint by way of amicable resolution would not
hamper the ability of the supervisory authorities to maintain the high level of
protection that the GDPR seeks to create; and that
b. such a conclusion, in this case, would likely carry advantages for the Data Subject,
whose rights under the GDPR would be vindicated swiftly, as well as for the controller,
who would be provided the opportunity to bring its behaviour into compliance with
the GDPR.
Amicable Resolution
7. The DPC engaged with both the Data Subject (via the Recipient SA) and Respondent in relation
to the subject-matter of the complaint. On 26 September 2023, the Recipient SA informed the
DPC that three of the four complained-of URLs now led to an error page and were no longer
linked to the Data Subject. The Recipient SA outlined that these journal articles appeared to
have been anonymised. However, one remaining URL continued to be returned in a search
against the Data Subject’s name.
8. On 12 October 2023, the DPC wrote to the Respondent formally commencing its investigation
of the complaint. The DPC requested that the Respondent confirm to it directly whether the
first three URLs identified by the Recipient SA had been anonymised. The DPC also noted that
the one remaining URL linked to a forum discussion which appeared to the DPC to consist
largely of subjective information without a readily apparent journalistic merit. The DPC
requested that the Respondent re-assess that specific aspect of the delisting request.
9. In response to the DPC’s investigation, the Respondent confirmed to the DPC that due to the
anonymisation of the Data Subject’s name in the source articles the first three complained-of
URLs had been delisted. The Respondent also agreed to delist the forum discussion URL.
10. In light of the fact that the Respondent had agreed to delist all complained-of URLs, as well
the explanations provided by the Respondent as set out above, the DPC considered it
appropriate to conclude the complaint by way of amicable resolution. On 27 November 2023,
the DPC wrote to the Data Subject (via the Recipient SA) outlining the Respondent’s actions in
response to the DPC’s investigation. In the circumstances, the DPC asked the Data Subject to
notify it, within a specified timeframe, if they were not satisfied with the outcome, so that the
DPC could take further action. The DPC did not receive any further communication from the
Data Subject and, accordingly, the complaint has been deemed to have been amicably
resolved.
3
11. On 8 February 2024, and in light of the foregoing, the DPC wrote to the Recipient SA noting
that the DPC considered the complaint to have been amicably resolved and withdrawn in
accordance with section 109(3) of the Act and that it would conclude the case and inform the
Respondent.
12. In circumstances where the subject-matter of the complaint has been amicably resolved, in
full, the complaint, by virtue of Section 109(3) of the 2018 Act, is deemed to have been
withdrawn by the Data Subject.
Confirmation of Outcome
13. For the purpose of Document 06/2022, the DPC confirms that:
a. The complaint, in its entirety, has been amicably resolved between the parties
concerned;
b. The agreed resolution is such that the object of the complaint no longer exists; and
c. Having consulted with the supervisory authorities concerned on the information set
out above, as required by Document 06/2022 the DPC has now closed off its file in
this matter.
14. If dissatisfied with the outcome recorded herein, the parties have the right to an effective
remedy by way of an application for judicial review, by the Irish High Court, of the process
applied by the DPC in the context of the within complaint.
Signed for and on behalf of the DPC:
_____________________________
Deputy Commissioner
Data Protection Commission
4