right to be forgotten
Subscribe to right to be forgotten's Posts

‘Right to Be Forgotten’ in Russian Data Protection Law Has Passed All Stages of Approval

On July 14, 2015, Vladimir Putin, the president of the Russian Federation, has signed the law on implementation of the “right to be forgotten” (the Law). The Law comes into force on January 1, 2016.

1. New obligations imposed on search engines on the Internet

The right to be forgotten applies to the information that had been disseminated by search engine operators distributing advertisements on the Internet for attracting attention of Russian consumers in the following cases:

  • Information had been disseminated in contradiction of legislative requirements;
  • Information that is inaccurate;
  • Information that is accurate but is no longer relevant due to the subsequent development or actions of a data subject (with some exceptions).

2. How will the right to be forgotten be exercised?

The request to delist search results submitted by a data subject (applicant) must contain certain information prescribed by the Law (e.g., full name, passport data, contact information of the applicant, specific information that should be forgotten, reasons for delisting, reference to the Internet website containing information, which shall be delisted, and consent to processing of the applicant’s personal data).

It is important to note that the right to be forgotten may be exercised only by individuals, and not legal entities.

Within 10 business days as of the receipt of the delisting request, search engine must perform one of the following actions:

  • Delist search results related to personal information of the applicant in case search results gained via search requests included name and (or) surname of the applicant
  • Provide the applicant with substantiated written refusal to delist the said search results

If the applicant does not agree with the decision made by the search engine, he or she is entitled to file a respective claim to the competent court.

Information on filing the delisting request by the applicant must be kept confidential by the search engine.

3. Liability for non-compliance

Along with the finally approved Law, another initiative has been submitted to the State Duma on May 29, 2015, and may be considered by the State Duma in the autumn session this year. If passed, the new initiative would institute an administrative fine in the amount of RUR 100,000 (approximately EUR 1,580) for a search engine’s unlawful failure to delist the links related to data subject’s personal information upon his or her request, or in the amount of RUR three million (approximately EUR 47,619) for the search engine’s failure to comply with the court decision requiring delisting of such links.

read more

Is There an End in Sight for EU Data Protection Reform?

On 5 November 2014, Peter Hustinx, the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), together with Germany’s Federal Data Protection Commissioner, Andrea Voβhoff, held a panel discussion in respect of the state of play and perspectives on EU data protection reform.

Although participants identified a number of key outstanding issues to be resolved prior to the conclusion of the reform process, there was some optimism that such issues could be overcome, and the process completed, before the end of 2015.


The EDPS is an independent supervisory authority whose members are elected by the European Parliament and the Council in order to protect personal information and privacy, in addition to promoting and supervising data protection in the European Union’s institutions and bodies.  The role of the EDPS includes inter alia advising on privacy legislation and policies to the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council and working with other data protection authorities (DPA) to promote consistent data protection throughout Europe.

The proposed data protection regulation is intended to replace the 1995 Data Protection Directive (95/46/EC) (the Directive) and aims not only to give individuals more control over their personal data, but also make it easier for companies to work across borders by harmonising laws between all EU Member States.  The European Parliament and the Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) Committee have driven the progress on new data protection laws, but there has been frustration aimed at the Council of Ministers for their slow progress.  Following the vote by the European Parliament in March 2014 in favour of the new data protection laws, the next steps include the full Ordinary Legislative Procedure (co-decision procedure), which requires the European Parliament and the Council to reach agreement together.

The panel discussion attendees were made up of institutional representatives and key figures involved in the EU Data Protection Reform Package, including: Stefano Mura (Head of the Department for International Affairs at Italy’s Ministry of Justice); Jan Albrecht MEP (Vice-Chair and Rapporteur of the European Parliament LIBE Committee); and Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin (President of CNIL and Chair of the Article 29 Working Party).  The purpose of the panel discussion was to consider the outstanding issues and next steps to finalise proposals on EU data protection reform, particularly in the context of the recent CJEU rulings on data retention and the right to be forgotten.

Key Messages

The key points raised during the panel discussion included:

  • There is optimism that the reform process will be completed in the next year subject to resolving outstanding issues, such as:
    • Whether public authority processing should be included in the proposed data protection regulation – Andrea Voshoff commented that this issue was being considered by the Council of Ministers Committee in relation to the introduction of a clause preventing the lowering of standards by national laws.  Stefano Mura added that while there is a desire for both a uniform approach between the EU Member States and a right for Member States to regulate their own public sectors, a [...]

      Continue Reading

read more

Article 29 Working Party Discusses the Right to be Forgotten

On 18 September 2014, the European Union’s Article 29 Data Protection Working Party published a press release outlining its recent plenary session discussions on the so-called “right to be forgotten” or “de-listed.”

The Working Party identifies that search engines, as data controllers, are under an obligation to acknowledge requests to be de-listed and establishes amongst European data protection authorities a “tool box” for ensuring a common approach to complaints handling in the case of refusals to de-list.


The Working Party, made up of EU member state national data protection authorities, is an independent advisory body on data protection and privacy, set up under Article 29 of the Data Protection Directive (95/46/EC) (DPD) in order to contribute to the DPD’s uniform application.

The purpose of its latest plenary session held on 16 and 17 September 2014 was to discuss the aftermath of the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) May 2014 ruling which recognised an EU citizen’s right to have the results of searches conducted against their name and containing their personal information removed where such information was inaccurate, inadequate, irrelevant or excessive for the purposes of data processing.

Key Messages

The Working Party has acknowledged that there is high public demand for the right to be forgotten, based on the number of complaints received by European data protection authorities relating to refusals by search engines to de-list since the ECJ ruling.

The Working Party has agreed that there is a need for a uniform approach to the handling of de-listing complaints.  As such the Working Party has proposed that:

  • It is necessary to put in place a network of dedicated contact persons within European data protection authorities to develop common case-handling criteria; and
  • Such a network will provide data protection authorities with a record of decisions taken on complaints and a dashboard to assist in reviewing similar, new or more difficult cases.

Going forwards the Working Party also confirmed that it will continue to review how search engines comply with the ECJ’s ruling, having already held a consultation process with search engines and media companies over the summer.

read more




2021 Chambers USA top ranked firm
LEgal 500 EMEA top tier firm 2021
U.S. News Law Firm of the Year 2022 Health Care Law