• Courses
      • Global Series of National Privacy Laws
      • Netherlands Privacy Academy (in Dutch)
      • Caribbean Privacy Academy (in Dutch)
    • Resources
    • Join GADPPRO ACADEMY
      • Join GADPPRO Academy as an Official Partner
      • Become an Official GADPPRO Training Entity
      • Join the GADPPRO Business Academy
      • Secretariat & International Training Centre
      • Contact Us
    •  
      • RegisterLog in
    Privacad GADPPRO Academy
      • Courses
        • Global Series of National Privacy Laws
        • Netherlands Privacy Academy (in Dutch)
        • Caribbean Privacy Academy (in Dutch)
      • Resources
      • Join GADPPRO ACADEMY
        • Join GADPPRO Academy as an Official Partner
        • Become an Official GADPPRO Training Entity
        • Join the GADPPRO Business Academy
        • Secretariat & International Training Centre
        • Contact Us
      •  
        • RegisterLog in

      Blog

      Criteria of the Right to be Forgotten in the search engines

      • Categories Blog, Business, Design / Branding, Free Data Protection Resources, Uncategorized
      • Date October 23, 2020

      Guidelines 05/2019 on criteria of the Right to be Forgotten in search engines

      Paragraph 2 at Exception 2 :  Performance of a task carried out in public interest or in the exercise of official authority

      66. Search engine providers are not public authorities and therefore do not exercise public powers by themselves.

      67. However, they could exercise those powers if they were attributed by the law of a Member State or of the Union. In the same way that they could carry out missions of public interest if their activity was considered necessary to satisfy that public interest in accordance with national legislation.

      68. Given the characteristics of search engine providers, it is unlikely that Member States will grant them public powers or consider that their activity or part of it is necessary for the achievement of a legally established public interest.

      69. If, in spite of that, there is a case in which the law of the Member States grants search engines public powers or links their activity to the achievement of a public interest, they could avail of the exemption provided for in Article 17.3.b GDPR. The considerations previously made on the cases in which the law of a Member State had established a legal obligation to process information for search engine providers are also valid in this case.

      70. To decide not to follow a delisting request for reasons related to this exemption, it is necessary to determine whether the maintenance of the information in the search engine results is necessary for the achievement of the public interest pursued or for the exercise of the powers of attorney.

      71. On the other hand, the legal definition of powers or public interest would be carried out by a Member State, and if the search engine rejects a request for delisting on the basis of this exemption, it must also be understood that it does so because it considers that its activity is necessary to achieve public interests. The search engine provider should, in that event, provide reasons why it considers its activity to be carried out in the public interest. Without such an explanation, the denial to follow a data subject’s delisting request does not have the possibility of relying on the exemption.

      72. Consequently, it would also be the Supervisory Authority of the Member State whose law is applicable that will have to deal with a potential complaint pursuant to Article 55.2 GDPR.

      • Share:
      author avatar
      Richard V

      Previous post

      Criteria of the Right to be Forgotten in the search engines
      October 23, 2020

      Next post

      Criteria of the Right to be Forgotten in the search engines
      October 23, 2020

      You may also like

      Children Safety Encryption www.privacad.com
      Apple’s New Step to Protect Child Abuse via Encryption Feature
      20 August, 2021
      DNA Technology and Privacy www.privacad.com
      DNA Technology Regulation Bill and Violation of Privacy for Minority Groups
      19 August, 2021
      www.privacad.com
      India accuses Twitter of not complying with new IT rules
      18 August, 2021

      Search

      Categories

      • Blog
      • Business
      • Design / Branding
      • Free Data Protection Resources
      • Nederlandse Privacy Academie
      • Uncategorized
      Facebook-f Linkedin-in

      © Privacad 2020

      For all your questions about courses

      students@privacad.com

      For all your questions about Privacad for business

      info@privacad.com

      Links

      • Courses
      • Become a GADPPRO Academy Official Training Entity
      • Resources
      • Free Data Protection Resources
      • Blog
      • Profile
      • Students Stewards Network (SSN)

      Support

      • Privacy Policy
      • Terms of Use
      • FAQs
      • Contact

      © GADPPRO Academy | Privacad 2022

      GADPPRO Academy 2022

      Login with your site account

      Lost your password?

      Not a member yet? Register now

      Register a new account

      Are you a member? Login now