CJEU - C-460/20 - TU, RE v Google

Summary

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled on case C-460/20 concerning Google's de-referencing obligations under GDPR. The court clarified that individuals requesting de-referencing must demonstrate the manifest inaccuracy of the information. The processing of personal data by search engines is distinct from the original publication, and the right to data protection must be balanced against freedom of expression.

Full text

Help CJEU - C-460/20 - TU, RE v Google: Difference between revisions From GDPRhub Jump to:navigation, search ← Older editVisualWikitext Revision as of 14:23, 9 July 2026 view sourceDs (talk | contribs)Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, noContributionReport, Administrators240 editsm Tag: Visual edit← Older edit Latest revision as of 13:10, 29 July 2026 view source Sfl (talk | contribs)Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, noContributionReport, Administrators522 editsm Tag: Visual edit Line 12: Line 12: |EU_Law_Name_1=Article 11 CFR|EU_Law_Name_1=Article 11 CFR |EU_Law_Link_1=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT|EU_Law_Link_1=http://data.europa.eu/eli/treaty/char_2012/oj |EU_Law_Name_2=Article 7 CFR|EU_Law_Name_2=Article 7 CFR |EU_Law_Link_2=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT|EU_Law_Link_2=http://data.europa.eu/eli/treaty/char_2012/oj |EU_Law_Name_3=Article 8 CFR|EU_Law_Name_3=Article 8 CFR |EU_Law_Link_3=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT|EU_Law_Link_3=http://data.europa.eu/eli/treaty/char_2012/oj |EU_Law_Name_4=Article 16 CFR|EU_Law_Name_4=Article 16 CFR |EU_Law_Link_4=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT|EU_Law_Link_4=http://data.europa.eu/eli/treaty/char_2012/oj Latest revision as of 13:10, 29 July 2026 CJEU - C-460/20 TU, RE v Google Court: CJEU Jurisdiction: European Union Relevant Law: Article 11 CFRArticle 7 CFRArticle 8 CFRArticle 16 CFR Decided: 08.12.2022 Parties: TU and others Google LLC Case Number/Name: C-460/20 TU, RE v Google European Case Law Identifier: Reference from: BGH (Germany) Language: 24 EU Languages Original Source: Judgement Initial Contributor: n/a The CJEU clarified the scope of de-referencing under Article 17(3)(a) GDPR. Contents 1 English Summary 1.1 Facts 1.2 Holding 2 Comment 3 Further Resources English Summary Facts TU and RE were directors and shareholders of investment companies. Three articles were published in the news criticizing their companies and showing pictures of TU and RE suggesting a luxury lifestyle. These articles were accessible upon research of their names in Google. TU and RE requested Google, as controller to de-reference the links to the articles from the list of search results when researching their names. Google refused to comply with this request. TU and RE therefore brought an action with the Landgericht Köln (Regional Court Cologne) to have the Court order Google to de-reference. They argued among other things that the articles contained inaccurate claims and defamatory opinions. After the dismissal of their action in first instance, TU and RE filed an appeal with the Oberlandesgericht Köln (Higher Regional Court Cologne). This appeal was also dismissed. TU and RE appealed this second decision with the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court) which referred two questions to the CJEU. Oskar J. Gstrein[1] summarized these questions as follows : "How should courts handle requests for de-referencing in cases where applicants claim that the information presented by a news outlet are inaccurate, and in which the legality of the publication depends on whether the claims are factually true? Is there an obligation of search engine providers such as Google to delete thumbnails from search engine results, even if the results contain a link to the original source?" Holding For the first question, the Court explained that the processing by the search engine (in this case Google) constitutes a processing of personal data and must be distinguished from the publication on the website. The Court then recalled that the right to data protection is not absolute and must be balanced with the right to freedom of expression. In this context, the Court held that it is to the person requesting de-referencing to establish the manifest inaccuracy of the information. The search engine cannot be required to assess the accuracy of the information published in order to handle a request on the basis of Article 17(3)(a) GDPR. The Court concluded that "de-referencing is not subject to the condition that the question of the accuracy of the referenced content has been resolved, at least provisionally, in an action brought by that person against the content provider.". For the second question, the Court held a similar reasoning. It considered that search engines must operate an assessment when displaying and using images and take into account the informative value of such images. Comment It is interesting to note that thumbnails and photographs can be object to a de-referencing request. Further Resources Share blogs or news articles here! ↑ The Right to be Forgotten in 2022, 20 December 2022, available on https://verfassungsblog.de/rtbf-2022/ Retrieved from "https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=CJEU_-_C-460/20_-_TU,_RE_v_Google&oldid=52552" Categories: CJEUEuropean Union This page was last edited on 29 July 2026, at 13:10. Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike unless otherwise noted. Privacy policy About GDPRhub Disclaimers

Entities