Comments on Judgment No. 36764 of 2024: Treatment of Personal Data in Judicial Context

Judgment No. 36764 of April 18, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, represents an important step forward in the protection of personal data in the judicial context. In this decision, the judges addressed the issue of the anonymization of identifying data present in judgments, referencing Article 52 of Legislative Decree No. 196 of 2003, known as the Privacy Code. The Court clarified that the request for anonymization must be justified by "legitimate reasons" and emphasized the importance of balancing the confidentiality of the individual with the need for the publicity of the judgment.

The Issue of Data Anonymization

The Court stated that, based on the general rule of full dissemination of the provision, it is up to the interested party to provide specific reasons to justify the request for anonymization. This means that anyone requesting anonymization must indicate the negative consequences that could arise from the publication of their data, such as:

• Implications for social and relational life;
• Possible discrimination or stigmatization;
• Effects on professional image.

This approach is in line with the principle of proportionality, which is the basis of many European and Italian regulations regarding the protection of personal data.

The Balance Between Confidentiality and Publicity

A crucial aspect highlighted by the judgment concerns the need for a balanced approach between the confidentiality needs of the individual and the publicity requirements of the judgment. This balance is essential to ensure that individual rights are respected without compromising the principle of transparency of the judicial system. The Court indicated that it is the responsibility of the applicant to demonstrate how the publication of their data could harm their dignity and daily life.

Processing of personal data in the judicial context - Request for anonymization of data reported in the judgment or other provision - "Legitimate reasons" on which the request must be based – Burden of indicating the reasons by the applicant. In terms of personal data processing, the request for anonymization of the personal details and other identifying data of the interested party reported in the judgment or other provision, as per Article 52, Legislative Decree No. 196 of June 30, 2003, must be based on "legitimate reasons," the assessment of which requires a balanced approach between the confidentiality needs of the individual and the publicity of the judgment. (In its reasoning, the Court specified that, in light of the general rule of full dissemination of the provision, it is the burden of the interested party to present specific reasons justifying the anonymization of the data, indicating the negative consequences that would arise on various aspects of their social and relational life, if the request were not accepted).

Conclusions

Judgment No. 36764 of 2024 represents a significant affirmation of the right to privacy in a judicial context. It highlights the need for thorough analysis and fair balancing between individual rights and the publicity needs of judgments. This approach not only protects the rights of individuals but also contributes to a fairer and more transparent judicial system, in line with the principles established by European and national regulations concerning the protection of personal data.