The limits of the right to be forgotten in the context of court of justice of the European Union case law on search engines

Abstract

In today's technological age, everything is easily available through the internet. As technology advances, the internet and social media have become an integral component of people's daily lives. Nonetheless, albeit all the benefits that modern technology advancements have brought forth, it is fair to say that perils to one’s rights to privacy and freedom of expression and information have been brought to the forefront. The purpose of this study is to analyse the right to be forgotten in the digital era, with a special emphasis on the Court of Justice of the European Union’s (CJEU) search engine jurisprudence. A thorough analysis of General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Article 17, which establishes the right to be forgotten—is at the heart of this inquiry. The aim is to delineate the limitations of the right to be forgotten in the context of a society growing more digitally connected, where personal information is easily available and frequently permanent. By analysing several significant case laws delivered by the CJEU, this research aims to evaluate the way in which the court balances the right to privacy in relation to other essential rights, including the freedom of expression and information. The study finds that the right to be forgotten is still a developing legal concept, however, there are substantial limitations to its implementation. In the cases analysed in this study, the CJEU accentuated that to avoid unnecessarily restricting public access to information, the right to be forgotten ought to be balanced against the right to freedom of expression and information, thus, necessitating a case-by-case analyses. Despite having a legal basis in the GDPR, the right to be forgotten is nevertheless ambiguous, particularly in regards to its territorial reach and interplay with other rights. Therefore, moving forward, clearer guidelines and preventive measures are needed to better safeguard privacy without infringing on freedom of expression.