Diana Dimitrova

European Data Protection Law Review, Volume 6 (2020), Issue 2, Page 211 - 230

The present article sets out to contribute to the discussion on the right to explanation of (automated) decisions and profiles by examining it in light of the right to access to one’s personal data. To that end it explores the right of access and explanation obligations beyond the GDPR by focusing also on Directive 2016/680, the CJEU case law, CoE Convention 108+ and ECtHR case law. The paper argues that whereas the right to know the reasoning and criteria underlying a decision could be derived from the right of access, this is less explicit in the case-law of the CJEU as compared to the ECtHR and Convention 108+. The discussion also points to the necessity of clarifying the relationship between and boundaries of data protection rights and other areas of law, eg the right to effective remedy and the obligation to state reasons for decisions. Keywords: right to explanation, right of access, GDPR, data rotection

Diana Dimitrova

European Data Protection Law Review, Volume 6 (2020), Issue 1, Page 152 - 157

López Ribalda and Others v Spain, Applications numbers 1874/13 and 8567/13, Judgment of European Court of Human Rights of 17 October 2019 Employees not notified of covert video surveillance at work. Other safeguards applicable. Domestic courts struck a fair balance in examining the privacy rights of the employees and the legitimate interests of the emplyoer. No violation of Article 8 ECHR.

Diana Dimitrova

European Data Protection Law Review, Volume 3 (2017), Issue 3, Page 418 - 422

Case C–13/16 Valsts policijas Rīgas reģiona pārvaldes Kārtības policijas pārvalde v Rīgas pašvaldības SIA ‘Rīgas satiksme’, 4 May 2017, ECLI:EU:C:2017:336.