IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aza/jdpp00/y2017v1i3p279-286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The right not to be subject to automated decision-making under the General Data Protection Regulation: Standard permission or default prohibition?

Author

Listed:
  • Devloo, Lise

Abstract

The right not to be subject to automated decision-making which has a legal or similar effect was originally taken up in the 1995 Privacy Directive and is thus not a new right in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The 1995 Privacy Directive left room for interpretation of its rights and obligations, of which the EU member states have made use. Some member states have interpreted the right as a ban on automated decision-making, while other member states allow automated decisions to which the data subject can object. The GDPR is a regulation, and therefore requires all EU member states to apply its rights and obligations in a uniform way. Therefore, a re-evaluation of current implementations of the right is necessary. This paper calls on the European legislators to take a clear standpoint. It also argues that the right not to be subject to automated decision-making should be interpreted as the default prohibition of automated decisions. This offers the most legal certainty to both companies and the individuals subject to said decisions. This interpretation is derived from the wording in the GDPR, the scope of the right to object to processing of personal data, and the spirit of the law.

Suggested Citation

  • Devloo, Lise, 2017. "The right not to be subject to automated decision-making under the General Data Protection Regulation: Standard permission or default prohibition?," Journal of Data Protection & Privacy, Henry Stewart Publications, vol. 1(3), pages 279-286, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:aza:jdpp00:y:2017:v:1:i:3:p:279-286
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hstalks.com/article/3641/download/
    Download Restriction: Requires a paid subscription for full access.

    File URL: https://hstalks.com/article/3641/
    Download Restriction: Requires a paid subscription for full access.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    automated decision-making; right to object; GDPR;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K2 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aza:jdpp00:y:2017:v:1:i:3:p:279-286. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Henry Stewart Talks (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.