1. Where a competent court of a Member State has information on proceedings, concerning the same subject matter as regards processing by the same controller or processor, that are pending in a court in another Member State, it shall contact that court in the other Member State to confirm the existence of such proceedings.
Article 81 GDPR - Suspension of proceedings
2. Where proceedings concerning the same subject matter as regards processing of the same controller or processor are pending in a court in another Member State, any competent court other than the court first seized may suspend its proceedings.
3. Where those proceedings are pending at first instance, any court other than the court first seized may also, on the application of one of the parties, decline jurisdiction if the court first seized has jurisdiction over the actions in question and its law permits the consolidation thereof.
Relevant Recitals
Frequently Asked Questions
Short answers to common questions about this provision. They are general information and not legal advice.
It coordinates parallel court proceedings in different Member States that concern the same subject matter as regards processing by the same controller or processor. Paragraph 1 obliges a competent court to contact the court in the other Member State to confirm that such proceedings exist, and paragraphs 2 and 3 then allow suspension or, at first instance, a declining of jurisdiction.
Under paragraph 1, whenever it has information on pending proceedings in another Member State concerning the same subject matter as regards processing by the same controller or processor. The contact serves only to confirm the existence of those proceedings; the consequences are dealt with in paragraphs 2 and 3.
No. Paragraph 2 states that any competent court other than the court first seized may suspend its proceedings, so suspension is discretionary. Only courts other than the one first seized have this option, which preserves the priority of the first action.
Paragraph 3 allows this only where the proceedings are pending at first instance, on the application of one of the parties, and only if the court first seized has jurisdiction over the actions in question and its law permits their consolidation. Outside these conditions the court is limited to the suspension option in paragraph 2.
Because Article 79(2) gives claimants a choice of forum, either the Member State where the controller or processor has an establishment or the Member State of the data subject's habitual residence, and Article 80 additionally allows representative bodies to bring actions. Different data subjects affected by the same processing can therefore sue in different Member States, and Article 81 exists to reduce the risk of irreconcilable judgments, a concern also voiced in Recital 144.