Abstract
The author of this chapter focused his attention on the new wave in the frame of privacy protection in the EU law: from co called “right to be forgotten” (case Google vs. Gonzáles) to General Data Protection Regulation (DCFR). Author explained especially the impact of the recent European development of the personal data protection on the Czech law including the newly prepared Czech personal Data Protection Act, the changes of doctrinal thinking and the challenges to the juridical practice in the Czech Republic.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
See for example the Decision of the Constitutional Court of Czech Republic from 22 March 2011, Pl. ÚS 24/10.
- 3.
See also Melzer F, Tégl P, a kol. (2013) Občanský zákoník - velký komentář, svazek I. § 1–117. Praha, Leges, p. 555.
- 4.
See for example Polčák (2012), p. 95.
- 5.
See the website of the Czech Supreme Court: http://www.nsoud.cz/:“Responsibility for the content of Internet websites is borne primarily by the person whose expression of will is at issue. This person used to be described in the professional literature as the content provider (also the operator of the websites or the keeper of the websites). The content provider is a specific person who hasn created or have to create the content (for example the websites or another data). The provider located this content (the website or another data) on the storage space of the disk reserved for this purpose by the provider of free space. The legal person has its own expression of will, too, and bears also the responsibility for the content of its websites. The entity providing hyperlinks to its own websites or links to other documents accesible on the Internet is called the hyperlink supplier.”
- 6.
The development of the application of non-pecuniary harm besides the pecuniary harm is aparent, among othečrs, in the decision of the Constitutional Court No Pl. ÚS 16/04 which declared the need of the application of not only pecuniary but also non-pecuniary harm in the case of personality protection. For this, see also the decision of the Supreme Court No 30 Cdo 1315/2008, which sumarized the conditions establishing the duty to cover the non-pecuniary harm.
- 7.
See the text of Sections 2951–2952, Civil Code: “Damage is compensated for by the restoration to the original state. If this is not reasonably possible, or if so requested by the victim, damage is payable in money. Non-pecuniary harm is compensated for by an appropriate satisfaction. The satisfaction must be provided in money, unless a real and sufficiently effective satisfaction for the harm incurred can be provided otherwise. The actual damage and what the victim has lost (lost profit) is paid for. If the damage results in a debt, the victim has the right to be released from the debt or provided with compensation by the tortfeasor… .”
- 8.
Source: Ipsos (the leading agency for the market and opinion research in the Czech Republic; www.ipsos.cz.
- 9.
Source: Profimedia.cz.
- 10.
The EU commissioner from the Czech Republic, Věra Jourová, significantly contributed to the approval of GDPR by the EU member countries.
- 11.
See the decisions of the Supreme Court No 28 Cdo 9312/2002 and Cdo 2162/2002 which declared the responsibility of both persons: the owner of the mass-media and the provider of information.
- 12.
- 13.
References
Decision of the Constitutional Court of Czech Republic from 22 March 2011, Pl. ÚS 24/10
Melzer F, Tégl P, a kol. (2013) Občanský zákoník - velký komentář, svazek I. § 1–117. Praha, Leges, p 550, 555
Polčák R (2012) Internet a proměny práva. Auditorium, Praha, p 95
Solove DA (2006) Taxonomy of privacy. Univ Pa Law Rev 154(3):477
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hurdík, J. (2020). The Right to Be Forgotten in the Czech Republic. In: Werro, F. (eds) The Right To Be Forgotten. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 40. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33512-0_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33512-0_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-33511-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-33512-0
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)