Right to Have Links Removed
| Author | Hielke Hijmans |
| Published date | 01 September 2014 |
| Date | 01 September 2014 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1023263X1402100309 |
| Subject Matter | Legal Debate |
21 MJ 3 (2014) 555
RIGHT TO HAVE LINKS REMOVED
Evidence of E ective Data Protection
Case C-131/12 Google v. Agencia Española de Protecciό n de Datos (AEPD) and Mario
Costeja Gonzalez, Judgment of 13May 2014
H H*
§1. IN T RO DUCT ION
e judgment delivered by the Court of Justice of the EU on 13 May 2014 in Google v.
Agencia Española de Protecciόn de Dato s (AEPD) and Mario Costeja Gonzalez1 provo ked
many reactions, with a wide variety of appreciations. e least one could say is that this
judgment is controversial.Its controversial nature follows directly from the main issues
it addresse s.
e backg round of the case is relatively easy to understand.
e judgment was the result of a complai nt by a Spanish resident – Mr. Costeja
Gonzalez – agai nst the fact that when his name was entered in Goog le Search, relatively
old pages of a Spanish newspaper were displayed. On t hese pages, his name was mentioned
in relation to the recovery of soci al securit y debts. As Mr. Costej a Gonzalez cla imed, the
issue was resolved for a number of years and t he data were now entirely irrelevant. By
claiming t his, he invoked his right to be forgotten.2
Initially t he claim was lodged with the Span ish data protection authority against the
newspaper and against t he search engine, more speci cal ly the parent company of the
Google group (Google Inc.), seated in the US as well as its subsid iary Google Spain. e
claim again st the newspaper was rejected ,3 but the claim aga inst the search engine was
* Associated researcher of the Free University Brussels (VUB) and the University of Amsterdam; O ce
of the Europ ean Data Protec tion Superv isor (Brussel s), until 1July 2014 as Head of Un it for Policy and
Consultations, currently on sabbatical.
1 Case C-131/12 Google v. Agencia Española de Prote cciόn de Datos (AEPD) and Mario Co steja Gonzalez ,
Judgment of 13May 2014, not yet reported, pa ra. 91.
2 Ibid., para. 91.
3 For (legal) reasons , not relevant in the context of t his article.
To continue reading
Request your trial