Texts to 22 Oct 2026

Digital Omnibus proposal· Recital 36

Analysis in our dossiers
Access, transparency and automated decisions

Text

Recital 36 Digital Omnibus proposal as printed in the Council text of 22 October 2026

Source Council, 22 October 2026. Recital 36: ST 14756/26, page 37 · pp. 37–38 · exact text page

Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 requires the controller to provide the data subject with certain information on the processing of his or her personal data as well as certain further information necessary to ensure fair and transparent processing, as defined in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of that provision. According to paragraph 4 of Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, that obligation does not apply where and insofar as the data subject already has the information. To further reduce the burden of controllers, without undermining the possibilities of the data subject to exercise his or her rights under Chapter III of that Regulation, this derogation should be extended to situations where there are reasonable grounds to believe that the data subject already has the information referred to in points (a) and (c) of paragraph 1 of Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in light of the context in which the personal data has been collected, and where the processing is not likely to result in a high risk, within the meaning of Article 35 of that Regulation. This derogation should not apply where the processing requires complex processing operations, the processing of large amounts of personal data, or personal data referred to in Articles 9 and 10 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. For example, there can be reasonable grounds to believe that the data subject already has such information in a direct and clearly circumscribed relationship, established for instance where the controller and the data subject interact directly in a specific occasion , such as the relationship between a craftsman and their clients.

The application of the derogation from the information obligation should not undermine the principle of transparency and should be limited to situations where the controller has reasonable grounds to believe that the data subject already possesses the required information. These should be the situations where the personal data are collected in the context of a direct and clearly circumscribed relationship between data subjects and a controller and does not involve the processing of a large amount of personal data nor complex processing operations or the processing of personal data referred to in Articles 9 and 10 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and where the scope of processing is limited to the minimum data necessary to perform the service. In such cases , it should be reasonable to expect, for instance, that the data subject has the information on the identity and contact details of the controller, as well as on the purpose of processing . The same should apply, under the aforementioned conditions, to associations and sport clubs where the processing of personal data is confined to the management of membership, communication with members and the organisation of activities. Nevertheless, this derogation from the obligations of Article 13 is without prejudice to the independent obligations of the controller under Article 15 of that Regulation, which applies in case the data subject requests access based on the latter provision. This derogation should only apply to processing operations which are foreseeable and non-complex, which is not the case in the field of employment or in relations with public authorities or public bodies or private entities for the performance of a task in the public interest. Where the derogation from the obligations of Article 13 does not apply, in order to balance the need for completeness and easy understanding by the data subject, controllers may adopt a layered approach when providing the information required, notably by allowing users to navigate to further information.

How the recital changed

Each text against the text before it

Recital Commission19 Nov 2025Rec 36Council21 May 2026Rec 36Council10 Jun 2026Rec 36Council18 Jun 2026Rec 36Council3 Sep 2026Rec 36Council2 Oct 2026Rec 36Council22 Oct 2026Rec 36
Compared withlaw in forcethe proposal21 May text10 Jun text18 Jun text3 Sep text2 Oct text
Recital 36 36 Added 36 Changed 36 Changed 36 Unchanged 36 Changed 36 Changed 36 Unchanged

Each text against the text before it: +Added in this text, not in the text before~Changed wording changed=Unchanged same as the text before

Parliament amendments propose other recitals under these numbers: Recital 36a (new) and Recital 36b (new).

Parliament amendments

13 amendments to this recital

6 amendments would delete the whole recital: members of The Left, S&D, Renew and non-attached members.

By political group; co-sponsored amendments count for each group
TypeThe LeftS&DGreens/EFARenewECRPfENI
− Deletion31·1··1
~ Alternative·31·211

By political group

  • − Deletion The Left 3 S&D 1 Renew 1 NI 1
  • ~ Alternative S&D 3 Greens/EFA 1 ECR 2 PfE 1 NI 1

Show

  1. 125 Deletion Arash SaeidiThe Left · JURI Deletes the recital

    [...]

    Tabled by
    Arash Saeidi
    Group
    The Left
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    JURI amendments 69–296 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Recital 36
  2. 335 Deletion Irena Joveva +5Renew · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital

    [...]

    Tabled by
    Irena Joveva, Michael McNamara, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Fabienne Keller
    Group
    Renew
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 251–400 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Recital 36
  3. 336 Deletion Pernando Barrena ArzaThe Left · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital

    [...]

    Tabled by
    Pernando Barrena Arza
    Group
    The Left
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 251–400 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Recital 36
  4. 337 Deletion Birgit SippelS&D · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital

    [...]

    Tabled by
    Birgit Sippel
    Group
    S&D
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 251–400 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Recital 36
  5. 338 Deletion Sibylle Berg +1NI · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital

    [...]

    Tabled by
    Sibylle Berg, Martin Sonneborn
    Group
    NI
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 251–400 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Recital 36
  6. 339 Deletion João OliveiraThe Left · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the recital

    [...]

    Tabled by
    João Oliveira
    Group
    The Left
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 251–400 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Recital 36
  7. 340 Alternative Marina Kaljurand +8S&D · ITRE–LIBE “Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 requires the data controller to provide the data subject with certain information on the processing of their…”

    (36) Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 requires the data controller to provide the data subject with certain information on the processing of his or hertheir personal data as well as certain further information necessary to ensure fair and transparent processing, as defined in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of that provision. According to paragraph 4 of Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, that obligation does not apply where and insofar as the data subject already has the information. To further reduce the burden of data controllers, without undermining the possibilities of the data subject to exercise his or her rights under Chapter III of the Regulation, this derogation should be extended to situations where the processing is not likely to result in a high risk, within the meaning of Article 35 of the Regulation, and there are reasonable grounds to assume that the data subject already has the information referred to in points (a) and (c) of paragraph 1 in the light of the context in which the personal data have been collected, in particular regarding the relationship between data subjects and the controller. These should be the situations where the context of the relationship between the controller and the data subject is very clear and circumscribed and the controller’s activity is not data-intensive, such as the relationship between a craftsman and their clients, where the scope of processing is limited to the minimum data necessary to perform the service. The controller’s activity is not data-intensive where it collects a low amount of personal data and its processing operations are not complex, which is not the case, for example, in the field of employment. In such circumstances, that is to say when the processing is non data-intensive, non-complex and where the controller collects a low amount of personal data, it should be reasonable to expect, for instance, that the data subject has the information on the identity and contact details of the controller as well as on the purpose of the processing when that processing is carried out for the performance of a contract to which a data subject is a party, or when the data subject has given his or her consent to that processing, in accordance with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The same should apply to associations and sport clubs where the processing of personal data is confined to the management of membership, communication with members and the organisation of activities. Nevertheless, this derogation from the obligations of Article 13 is without prejudice to the independent obligations of the controller under Article 15 of that Regulation, which applies in case the data subject requests access based on the latter provision. Where the derogation from the obligations of Article 13 does not apply, in order to balance the need for completeness and easy understanding by the data subject, controllers may adopt a layered approach when providing the information required, notably by allowing users to navigate to further information.

    Tabled by
    Marina Kaljurand, Elena Sancho Murillo, Brando Benifei, Birgit Sippel, Alex Agius Saliba, Francisco Assis, Elisabeth Grossmann, Kristian Vigenin, Matjaž Nemec
    Group
    S&D
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 251–400 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Recital 36
  8. 341 Alternative Alex Agius SalibaS&D · ITRE–LIBE “Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 requires the data controller to provide the data subject with certain information on the processing of his or…”

    (36) Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 requires the data controller to provide the data subject with certain information on the processing of his or her personal data as well as certain further information necessary to ensure fair and transparent processing, as defined in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of that provision. According to paragraph 4 of Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, that obligation does not apply where and insofar as the data subject already has the information. To further reduce the burden of data controllers, without undermining the possibilities of the data subject to exercise his or her rights under Chapter III of the Regulation, this derogation should be extended to situations where the processing is not likely to result in a high risk, within the meaning of Article 35 of the Regulation, and there are reasonable grounds to assume that the data subject already has the information referred to in points (a) and (c) of paragraph 1 in the light of the context in which the personal data have been collected, in particular regarding the relationship between data subjects and the controller. These should be the situations where the context of the relationship between the controller and the data subject is very clear and circumscribed and the controller’s activity is not data-intensive, such as the relationship between a craftsman and their clients, where the scope of processing is limited to the minimum data necessary to perform the service. The controller’s activity is not data-intensive where it collects a low amount of personal data and its processing operations are not complex, which is not the case, for example, in the field of employment. In such circumstances, that is to say when the processing is non data-intensive, non-complex and where the controller collects a low amount of personal data, it should be reasonable to expect, for instance, that the data subject has the information on the identity and contact details of the controller as well as on the purpose of the processing when that processing is carried out for the performance of a contract to which a data subject is a party, or when the data subject has given his or her consent to that processing, in accordance with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The same should apply to associations and sport clubs where the processing of personal data is confined to the management of membership, communication with members and the organisation of activities. Nevertheless, this derogation from the obligations of Article 13 is without prejudice to the independent obligations of the controller under Article 15 of that Regulation, which applies in case the data subject requests access based on the latter provision. Where the derogation from the obligations of Article 13 does not apply, in order to balance the need for completeness and easy understanding by the data subject, controllers may adopt a layered approach when providing the information required, notably by allowing users to navigate to further information.

    Tabled by
    Alex Agius Saliba
    Group
    S&D
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 251–400 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Recital 36
  9. 342 Alternative Markéta GregorováGreens/EFA · ITRE–LIBE “and the average data subject comprehends the processing, the data needs to be collected directly from the data subject, the processing needs to be…”

    (36) Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 requires the data controller to provide the data subject with certain information on the processing of his or her personal data as well as certain further information necessary to ensure fair and transparent processing, as defined in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of that provision. According to paragraph 4 of Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, that obligation does not apply where and insofar as the data subject already has the information. To further reduce the burden of data controllers, without undermining the possibilities of the data subject to exercise his or her rights under Chapter III of the Regulation, this derogation should be extended to situations where the processing is not likely to result in a high risk, within the meaning of Article 35 of the Regulation, and there are reasonable grounds to assume that the data subject already has the information referred to in points (a) and (c) of paragraph 1 in the light of the context in which the personal data have been collected, in particular regarding the relationship between data subjects and the controller.To further reduce the burden of data controllers, without undermining the possibilities of the data subject to exercise his or her rights under Chapter III of the Regulation, this derogation should be extended to situations where the personal data have been collected by a micro, small, and medium-sized enterprise or an organisation employing fewer than 250 employees, the personal data are necessary based on point (b) of paragraph 1 of Article 6 in the context of a clear and circumscribed relationship between the data subject and a controller which the data subject fully comprehends and which is not data-intensive, the controller is not required to appoint a data protection officer pursuant to Article 37(1), the personal data are not special categories of data pursuant to Article 9 or personal data related to criminal convictions and offences pursuant to Article 10, there are reasonable grounds to assume that the data subject already has the information referred to in points (a) and (c) of paragraph 1 and the information remains available to the data subject, the controller does not transmit the data to other controllers or to a third country, the controller does not carry out automated decision-making, including profiling, referred to in Article 22(1) and the processing is not likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects within the meaning of Article 35. These should be the situations where theThe context of the relationship between the controller and the data subject is very clear and circumscribed andin the controller’s activity is not data-intensive,situations such as the relationship between a craftsman and their clients, where the scope of processing is limited to the minimum data necessary to perform the service. The processing could for instance be limited to activities related to bookings, orders or appointments as long as the controller fulfills all the requirements. The personal data needs, however, to be collected by the controller directly from the data subject. The controller’s activity is not data-intensive where it collects a low amount of personal data and its processing operations are not complex, which is not the case, for example, in the field of employment or profiling. Complex processing operations are outside the scope of this exemption notably as the average data subject would not be in the capacity to comprehend them. In such circumstances, that is to say when the processing is non data-intensive, non-complex and where the controller collects a low amount of personal data, it should be reasonable to expect, for instance, that the data subject has the information on the identity and contact details of the controller as well as on the purpose of the processing when that processing is carried out for the performance of a contract to which a data subject is a party, or when the data subject has given his or her consent to that processing, in accordance with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679.In order to assume that the data subject has the information referred to in points (a) and (c) of paragraph 1 of Article 13 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and the average data subject comprehends the processing, the data needs to be collected directly from the data subject, the processing needs to be non data-intensive, non-complex and the controller needs to collect a low amount of personal data. The information needs, however, to remain available to the data subject through other means, in order to enable the data subject to exercise its rights or check the lawfulness of the processing. That information can either be made available to the public, such as on the website of the controller or it could, for instance in the case of controllers not having a website, be available upon request. The same should apply to associations and sport clubs where the processing of personal data is confined to the management of membership, communication with members and the organisation of activities. If the controller aims for more transparency, the controller may alternatively provide the information solely through the icons referred to in Article 12(7) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, as long as the complete information remains easily and readily available to the data subject through other means. Nevertheless, this derogation from the obligations of Article 13 is without prejudice to the independent obligations of the controller under Article 15 of that Regulation, which applies in case the data subject requests access based on the latter provision. Where the derogation from the obligations of Article 13 does not apply, in order to balance the need for completeness and easy understanding by the data subject, controllers may adopt a layered approach when providing the information required, notably by allowing users to navigate to further information.

    Tabled by
    Markéta Gregorová on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
    Group
    Greens/EFA
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 251–400 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Recital 36
  10. 343 Alternative Julie Rechagneux +8ECR, PfE · ITRE–LIBE “The same applies to associations, sport clubs, and micro, small and medium-sized enterprises where the processing of personal data is confined to the…”

    (36) Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 requires the data controller to provide the data subject with certain information on the processing of his or her personal data as well as certain further information necessary to ensure fair and transparent processing, as defined in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of that provision. According to paragraph 4 of Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, that obligation does not apply where and insofar as the data subject already has the information. To further reduce the burden of data controllers, without undermining the possibilities of the data subject to exercise his or her rights under Chapter III of the Regulation, this derogation should be extended to situations where the processing is not likely to result in a high risk, within the meaning of Article 35 of the Regulation, and there are reasonable grounds to assume that the data subject already has the information referred to in points (a) and (c) of paragraph 1 in the light of the context in which the personal data have been collected, in particular regarding the relationship between data subjects and the controller. These should be the situations where the context of the relationship between the controller and the data subject is very clear and circumscribed and the controller’s activity is not data-intensive, such as the relationship between a craftsman and their clients, where the scope of processing is limited to the minimum data necessary to perform the service. The controller’s activity is not data-intensive where it collects a low amount of personal data and its processing operations are not complex, which is not the case, for example, in the field of employment. The same applies to associations, sport clubs, and micro, small and medium-sized enterprises where the processing of personal data is confined to the management of membership, communication with members, the organisation of activities, or the performance of a contract with the data subject. The derogation does not apply where the controller engages in the collection of personal data from third parties, in their purchase, aggregation, enrichment, sale or making available to third parties for commercial purposes, such activities being by nature data-intensive. In such circumstances, that is to say when the processing is non data-intensive, non-complex and where the controller collects a low amount of personal data, it should be reasonable to expect, for instance, that the data subject has the information on the identity and contact details of the controller as well as on the purpose of the processing when that processing is carried out for the performance of a contract to which a data subject is a party, or when the data subject has given his or her consent to that processing, in accordance with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The same should apply to associations and sport clubs where the processing of personal data is confined to the management of membership, communication with members and the organisation of activities. Nevertheless, this derogation from the obligations of Article 13 is without prejudice to the independent obligations of the controller under Article 15 of that Regulation, which applies in case the data subject requests access based on the latter provision. Where the derogation from the obligations of Article 13 does not apply, in order to balance the need for completeness and easy understanding by the data subject, controllers may adopt a layered approach when providing the information required, notably by allowing users to navigate to further information.

    Tabled by
    Julie Rechagneux, Mélanie Disdier, Aleksandar Nikolic, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Alexandre Varaut, Fabrice Leggeri, Marion Maréchal, António Tânger Corrêa, Christophe Bay
    Group
    ECR, PfE
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 251–400 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Recital 36
  11. 344 Alternative Sebastian Tynkkynen +1ECR · ITRE–LIBE “as well as other entities with similarly limited and transparent processing activities, such as small cultural or educational associations and…”

    (36) Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 requires the data controller to provide the data subject with certain information on the processing of his or her personal data as well as certain further information necessary to ensure fair and transparent processing, as defined in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of that provision. According to paragraph 4 of Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, that obligation does not apply where and insofar as the data subject already has the information. To further reduce the burden of data controllers, in particular SMEs and micro-enterprises without undermining the possibilities of the data subject to exercise his or her rights under Chapter III of the Regulation, this derogation should be extended to situations where the processing is not likely to result in a high risk, within the meaning of Article 35 of the Regulation, and there are reasonable grounds to assume that the data subject already has the information or the data controller has taken reasonable steps available to it, taking into account relevant technical and organisational means to provide the data subject with the information referred to in points (a) and (c) of paragraph 1 in the light of the context in which the personal data have been collected, in particular regarding the relationship between data subjects and the controller. These should be the situations where the context of the relationship between the controller and the data subject is very clear and circumscribed and the controller’s activity is not data-intensive, such as the relationship between aSMEs, craftsmanmicro-enterprises and their clients, where the scope of processing is limited to the minimum data necessary to perform the service. The controller’s activity is not data-intensive where it collects a low amount of personal data and its processing operations are not complex, which is not the case, for example, in the field of employment. In such circumstances, that is to say when the processing is non data-intensive, non-complex and where the controller collects a low amount of personal data, it should be reasonable to expect, for instance, that the data subject has the information on the identity and contact details of the controller as well as on the purpose of the processing when that processing is carried out for legitimate interests, the performance of a contract to which a data subject is a party, or when the data subject has given his or her consent to that processing, in accordance with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The same should apply to freelancers or sole traders providing services to their customers, local craftsmen, retailers or hospitality businesses, and associations and sport clubs, as well as other entities with similarly limited and transparent processing activities, such as small cultural or educational associations and non-profit organisations serving a clearly defined group of members or beneficiaries where the processing of personal data is confined to the management of membership, communication with members and the organisation of activities. Nevertheless, this derogation from the obligations of Article 13 is without prejudice to the independent obligations of the controller under Article 15 of that Regulation, which applies in case the data subject requests access based on the latter provision. Where the derogation from the obligations of Article 13 does not apply, in order to balance the need for completeness and easy understanding by the data subject, controllers may adopt a layered approach when providing the information required, notably by allowing users to navigate to further information.

    Tabled by
    Sebastian Tynkkynen, Diego Solier
    Group
    ECR
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 251–400 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Recital 36
  12. 345 Alternative Diana Iovanovici ŞoşoacăNI · ITRE–LIBE “At the end of the contract, personal data should be deleted securely from the controller’s system in order to prevent use that is improper and not…”

    (36) Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 requires the data controller to provide the data subject with certain information on the processing of his or her personal data as well as certain further information necessary to ensure fair and transparent processing, as defined in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of that provision. According to paragraph 4 of Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, that obligation does not apply where and insofar as the data subject already has the information. To further reduce the burden of data controllers, without undermining the possibilities of the data subject to exercise his or her rights under Chapter III of the Regulation, this derogation should be extended to situations where the processing is not likely to result in a high risk, within the meaning of Article 35 of the Regulation, and there are reasonable grounds to assume that the data subject already has the information referred to in points (a) and (c) of paragraph 1 in the light of the context in which the personal data have been collected, in particular regarding the relationship between data subjects and the controller. These should be the situations where the context of the relationship between the controller and the data subject is very clear and circumscribed and the controller’s activity is not data-intensive, such as the relationship between a craftsman and their clients, where the scope of processing is limited to the minimum data necessary to perform the service. The controller’s activity is not data-intensive where it collects a low amount of personal data and its processing operations are not complex, which is not the case, for example, in the field of employment. In such circumstances, that is to say when the processing is non data-intensive, non-complex and where the controller collects a low amount of personal data, it should not be reasonable to expect, for instance, that the data subject has the information on the identity and contact details of the controller as well as on the purpose of the processing when that processing is carried out for the performance of a contract to which a data subject is a party, or when the data subject has given his or her consent to that processing, in accordance with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679.At the end of the contract, personal data should be deleted securely from the controller’s system in order to prevent use that is improper and not consented to by the data subject. The same should apply to associations and sport clubs where the processing of personal data is confined to the management of membership, communication with members and the organisation of activities. Nevertheless, this derogation from the obligations of Article 13 is without prejudice to the independent obligations of the controller under Article 15 of that Regulation, which applies in case the data subject requests access based on the latter provision. Where the derogation from the obligations of Article 13 does not apply, in order to balance the need for completeness and easy understanding by the data subject, controllers may adopt a layered approach when providing the information required, notably by allowing users to navigate to further information.

    Tabled by
    Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă
    Group
    NI
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 251–400 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Recital 36
  13. 346 Alternative Elena Sancho Murillo +6S&D · ITRE–LIBE “Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 requires the data controller to provide the data subject with certain information on the processing of his or…”

    (36) Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 requires the data controller to provide the data subject with certain information on the processing of his or her personal data as well as certain further information necessary to ensure fair and transparent processing, as defined in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of that provision. According to paragraph 4 of Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, that obligation does not apply where and insofaras far as the data subject already has the information. To further reduce the burden of data controllers, without undermining the possibilities of the data subject to exercise his or her rights under Chapter III of the Regulation, this derogation should be extended to situations where the processing is not likely to result in a high risk, within the meaning of Article 35 of the Regulation, and there are reasonable grounds to assume that the data subject already has the information referred to in points (a) and (c) of paragraph 1 in the light of the context in which the personal data have been collected, in particular regarding the relationship between data subjects and the controller. These should be the situations where the context of the relationship between the controller and the data subject is very clear and circumscribed and the controller’s activity is not data-intensive, such as the relationship between a craftsman and their clients, where the scope of processing is limited to the minimum data necessary to perform the service. The controller’s activity is not data-intensive where it collects a low amount of personal data and its processing operations are not complex, which is not the case, for example, in the field of employment. In such circumstances, that is to say when the processing is non data-intensive, non-complex and where the controller collects a low amount of personal data, it should be reasonable to expect, for instance, that the data subject has the information on the identity and contact details of the controller as well as on the purpose of the processing when that processing is carried out for the performance of a contract to which a data subject is a party, or when the data subject has given his or her consent to that processing, in accordance with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The same should apply to associations and sport clubs where the processing of personal data is confined to the management of membership, communication with members and the organisation of activities. Nevertheless, this derogation from the obligations of Article 13 is without prejudice to the independent obligations of the controller under Article 15 of that Regulation, which applies in case the data subject requests access based on the latter provision. Where the derogation from the obligations of Article 13 does not apply, in order to balance the need for completeness and easy understanding by the data subject, controllers may adopt a layered approach when providing the information required, notably by allowing users to navigate to further information.

    Tabled by
    Elena Sancho Murillo, Marina Kaljurand, Brando Benifei, José Cepeda, Lina Gálvez, Francisco Assis, Alex Agius Saliba
    Group
    S&D
    Targets
    Digital Omnibus proposal Recital 36
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 251–400 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Recital 36