Accept Refuse

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62018CN0708

Case C-708/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from Tribunalul Bucureşti (Romania) lodged on 6 November 2018 — TK v Asociaţia de Proprietari bloc M5A Scara-A

OJ C 65, 18.2.2019, p. 23–24 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

18.2.2019   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/23


Request for a preliminary ruling from Tribunalul Bucureşti (Romania) lodged on 6 November 2018 — TK v Asociaţia de Proprietari bloc M5A Scara-A

(Case C-708/18)

(2019/C 65/31)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Bucureşti

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: TK

Defendant: Asociaţia de Proprietari bloc M5A-Scara A

Questions referred

1.

Are Articles 8 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 7(f) of Directive 95/46/EC, (1) on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data, to be interpreted as precluding a provision of national law such as that at issue in the main proceedings, namely Article 5(2) of Law No 677/2001, and Article 6 of Decision No 52/2012 of the ANSPDCP (Autoritatea Națională de Supraveghere a Prelucrării Datelor cu Caracter Personal, the National Authority for the Supervision of the Processing of Personal Data), in accordance with which video surveillance may be used to ensure the safety and protection of individuals, property and valuables and for the pursuit of legitimate interests, without the consent of the person concerned?

2.

Are Articles 8 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to be interpreted as meaning that the limitation of rights and freedoms which results from video surveillance is in accordance with the principle of proportionality, satisfies the requirement of being necessary and meets objectives of general interest or the need to protect the rights and freedoms of others, where the controller is able to take other measures to protect the legitimate interest in question?

3.

Is Article 7(f) of Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data to be interpreted as meaning that the ‘legitimate interests’ of the controller must be proven, present and effective at the time of the data processing?

4.

Is Article 6(1)(e) of Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data to be interpreted as meaning that data processing (video surveillance) is excessive or inappropriate where the controller is able to take other measures to protect the legitimate interest in question?


(1)  Directive 95/46/EC 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 (OJ 1995 L 281, p. 31).


Top