Accept Refuse

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62016CN0013

Case C-13/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Latvia) lodged on 8 January 2016 — Valsts policijas Rīgas reģiona pārvaldes Kārtības policijas pārvalde v Rīgas pašvaldības SIA ‘Rīgas satiksme’

OJ C 111, 29.3.2016, p. 10–11 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

29.3.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 111/10


Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Latvia) lodged on 8 January 2016 — Valsts policijas Rīgas reģiona pārvaldes Kārtības policijas pārvalde v Rīgas pašvaldības SIA ‘Rīgas satiksme’

(Case C-13/16)

(2016/C 111/13)

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākā tiesa

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Valsts policijas Rīgas reģiona pārvaldes Kārtības policijas pārvalde

Respondent: Rīgas pašvaldības SIA ‘Rīgas satiksme’

Question referred

Must the phrase ‘is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the … third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed’, in Article 7(f) of Directive 95/46/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, be interpreted as meaning that the National Police must disclose to Rīgas satiksme the personal data sought by the latter which are necessary in order for civil proceedings to be initiated? Is the fact that, as the documents in the case file indicate, the taxi passenger whose data is sought by the Rīgas satiksme was a minor at the time of the accident relevant to the answer to that question?


(1)  OJ 1995 L 281, p. 31.


Top