Silme Hakkı Şikayetinin Kapatılması

EDPBI:LU:OSS:D:2025:3424 — LU SA final decision (Article 16 (Right to rectification), Article 17 (Right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’)))

CNPD
COMMISSION
NATIONALE
POUR LA
PROTECTION
DES DONNEES

Deliberation No 49_RECL40_2025 of 23 April 2025 of the National Data Protection Commission, in a plenary session, on complaint file No 1.864 lodged against the company [REDACTED] via IMI Article 56 procedure 48688

Having regard to 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 (hereinafter: the 'GDPR');

Having regard to the Act of 1 August 2018 on the organisation of the National Data Protection Commission and the general data protection framework (hereinafter: the 'Law of 1 August 2018');

Having regard to the Rules of Procedure of the National Data Protection Commission adopted by Decision No 07AD/2024 of 23 February 2024 (hereinafter: the 'ROP');

Having regard to the Procedure for complaints before the National Data Protection Commission adopted on 16 October 2020 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Complaint Procedure before the CNPD');

Having regard to the following:

# I. Facts and procedure

1. In the framework of the European cooperation, as provided for in Chapter VII of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 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 or GDPR), the Supervisory Authority of Austria submitted to the National Data Protection Commission (hereinafter: "the CNPD") a complaint (national reference of the concerned authority: D130.077) via IMI in accordance with Article 56 procedure - 48688.
2. The complaint was lodged against the controller [REDACTED] (hereafter [REDACTED]), who has its main establishment in Luxembourg. Under Article 56 GDPR, the CNPD is therefore competent to act as the lead supervisory authority.
3. The original IMI claim stated the following:

"The complainant is the author of a book. This book is not being sold any longer. She requested the erasure of this book title in combination with her full name from [REDACTED] but [REDACTED] did not comply. Precisely, [REDACTED] replied the complainant should use a contact form for this particular erasure request, however this contact form requires an [REDACTED] account which the complainant does not have and does not want to register. Therefore, a complaint was brought to the Austrian Data Protection Authority requesting the complete erasure of her full name in

CNPD
COMMISSION
NATIONALE
POUR LA
PROTECTION
DES DONNEES

combination with the book title. Just for information, the complainant also mentioned aspects of intellectual property regarding the book title, though they cannot be part of this case naturally. Check the complaint and all the links and screenshots provided (especially the Link of [REDACTED] and page 14/17 of the complaint for book title and author details)."

4. In essence, the complainant asked the CNPD to request [REDACTED] to delete her personal data.
5. The complaint is therefore based on Article 17 GDPR.
6. On the basis of this complaint and in accordance with Article 57(1)(f) GDPR, the CNPD requested [REDACTED] to take a position on the facts reported by the complainant and to provide a detailed description of the issue relating to the processing of the complainant's personal data, in particular with regard to her request for erasure. Moreover, the CNPD required [REDACTED] to proceed to the deletion of the complainant's personal data as soon as possible, unless legal reasons prevent the former from doing so.
7. The CNPD received the requested information within the deadlines set.

## II. In law

### 1. Applicable legal provisions

8. Article 77 GDPR provides that "without prejudice to any other administrative or judicial remedy, every data subject shall have the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority, (...) if the data subject considers that the processing of personal data relating to him or her infringes this Regulation."
9. Pursuant to Article 17 GDPR, a data subject may request the erasure of his or her personal data and the controller must erase the data subject's personal data without undue delay if one of the grounds provided for in Article 17 (1) GDPR applies unless the controller can demonstrate that the processing falls within the scope of one of the exceptions set out in Article 17 (3) GDPR.
10. Furthermore, in application of Article 12(2) GDPR "the controller shall facilitate the exercise of data subject rights under Articles 15 to 22". Recital 59 GDPR emphasises that "Modalities should be provided for facilitating the exercise of the data subject's rights under this Regulation, including mechanisms to request and, if applicable, obtain, free of charge, in particular, access to and rectification or

CNPD
COMMISSION
NATIONALE
POUR LA
PROTECTION
DES DONNEES

erasure of personal data and the exercise of the right to object. The controller should also provide means for requests to be made electronically, especially where personal data are processed by electronic means."

11. Article 12(4) GDPR provides that "If the controller does not take action on the request of the data subject, the controller shall inform the data subject without delay and at the latest within one month of receipt of the request of the reasons for not taking action and on the possibility of lodging a complaint with a supervisory authority and seeking a judicial remedy."

12. Article 56(1) GDPR provides that "(...) the supervisory authority of the main establishment or of the single establishment of the controller or processor shall be competent to act as lead supervisory authority for the cross-border processing carried out by that controller or processor in accordance with the procedure provided in Article 60";

13. According to Article 60(1) GDPR, "The lead supervisory authority shall cooperate with the other supervisory authorities concerned in accordance with this Article in an endeavour to reach consensus. The lead supervisory authority and the supervisory authorities concerned shall exchange all relevant information with each other";

14. According to Article 60(3) GDPR, "The lead supervisory authority shall, without delay, communicate the relevant information on the matter to the other supervisory authorities concerned. It shall without delay submit a draft decision to the other supervisory authorities concerned for their opinion and take due account of their views";

## 2. In the present case

15. Following the intervention of the Luxembourg supervisory authority, the controller confirmed that:

- [REDACTED] confirmed that it received the complainant's request for removal of the detail page of the [BOOK] in 2012 due to copyright and trademark violations. The detail page of the book on the website [REDACTED] was created in error in May 2018 and was removed upon receipt of this complaint.

- [REDACTED] stated that the removal request from the complainant was not a request for erasure under article 17 (1) GDPR because it had not made

CNPD
COMMISSION
NATIONALE
POUR LA
PROTECTION
DES DONNEES

personal data public in the sense of article 17 (2) GDPR. The product detail page of the book informs about the general characteristics of the book, in particular title of the book, image of the book, name of the author, ISBN number, publisher, publishing date and the purchase price. This is not personal data of the complainant, but information released to the public by the complainant and/or the [EDITOR] for the purpose of commercially trading this book. The information is currently available in library catalogues and ISBN databases.

- [REDACTED] provided following information concerning the website [REDACTED] is a free service for authors whose books are listed in our catalogue, giving these authors the possibility to upload information about themselves or their publications that can be used for the sale and promotion of their books on the website. Within [REDACTED] authors who are logged in to their account can get in touch with us via a contact form. It is however not mandatory for an author to have an account with [REDACTED] in order to contact us. Any author can contact us via phone, e-mail or letter under the contact details given on our website."

- Nonetheless, after consideration, the request of erasure of the complainant has de facto been granted.

### 3. Outcome of the case

16. The CNPD, in a plenary session, therefore considers that, at the end of the investigation of the present complaint, the controller has taken appropriate measures to grant the complainant's right to erasure.

17. Thus, in the light of the foregoing, and the residual nature of the gravity of the alleged facts and the degree of impact on fundamental rights and freedoms, it does not appear necessary to continue to deal with that complaint. Moreover, the CNPD is of the view that the issue has been resolved in a satisfactory manner.

18. The CNPD then consulted the supervisory authority of Austria, pursuant to Article 60(1), whether it agreed to close the case. The Supervisory Authority of Austria has responded affirmatively so that the CNPD has therefore concluded that no further action was necessary and that the cross-border complaint could be closed.

In light of the above developments, the National Data Protection Commission, in a plenary session, after having deliberated, decides:

![img-0.jpeg](img-0.jpeg)

- To close the complaint file 1.864 upon completion of its investigation, in accordance with the Complaints Procedure before the CNPD and after obtaining the agreement of the concerned supervisory authority. As per Article 60(7) GDPR, the lead supervisory authority shall adopt and notify the decision to the main establishment or single establishment of the controller.

Belvaux, dated 23 April 2025

The National Data Protection Commission

Chair Commissioner Commissioner

### Indication of remedies

This Administrative Decision may be the subject of an appeal for amendment within three months of its notification. Such an action must be brought by the interested party before the administrative court and must be brought by a lawyer at the Court of one of the Bar Associations.

Silme Hakkı Şikayetinin Kapatılması

Türkçe özet

Hukuki mesele

Sonuç

Karar metni