Abstract
The protection and storage of personal data are clearly related to the right to respect for privacy, as guaranteed by art. 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The latter provision protects a whole range of rights, namely the right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence. The principle is that art. 8 protects personal information in respect of which an individual can legitimately hope that it will not be published or used without his or her consent. The study aims to break into the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the main objective being to identify decisions that have a fundamental impact on the doctrine and practice of personal data collection. We are aware that multiple regulations in the field of personal data collection can be deduced from the practice of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). However, given the direct impact of ECtHR decisions on the Republic of Moldova, we found it appropriate to summarize only this aspect. However, in subsequent studies we will address the issue of personal data protection by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The basic idea, derived from that study, is that the Moldovan authorities should adjust their legislation and practices to the standards set out by the ECtHR and thus avoid possible convictions by the European Court.
Highlights
The protection and retention of personal data is clearly part of the right to respect for private life as guaranteed by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The latter provision protects a whole range of rights, namely the right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence
The Court ruled that there had been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention, finding that French law did not indicate with sufficient clarity the extent and manner of exercise of the authorities’ discretion in this area
The Court held that Article 8 of the Convention had been breached in the present case because the telephone call had been recorded, and that the same Article had been breached because the file had been created and kept, finding that such interference with the applicant’s right to respect for his private life was not provided for by law, since Swiss law was unclear as to the discretionary power of the authorities in this area
Summary
The applicant claimed, in particular, that the collection of her personal medical data by a state agency - in this case, the Health and Work Capacity Quality Control Inspectorate (,,MADEKKI’’) - without her consent violated her right to respect for her private life.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
