Logo RGPD
RGPD.click
/
  1. Home
  2. Resources
  3. Fiches
  4. Right to Erasure ('Right to be Forgotten') (Art. 17)
Courses Guides Blog Resources News
Français English Nederlands
Fiche 35/54 Part 4 — Data Subject Rights Advanced Reviewed 2026-08-23

Right to Erasure ('Right to be Forgotten') (Art. 17)

Article 17 empowers individuals to obtain the erasure of their personal data in cases specified under Article 17(1). However, the right to erasure is not absolute; it does not apply where processing r

Open in interactive reader
⚖️ Conditional Right 🏛️ CJEU C-131/12 Google Spain

Right to Erasure ('Right to be Forgotten') (Art. 17)

⚡ In 30 seconds

Under Article 17, data subjects have the right to obtain the erasure of personal data without undue delay where one of six statutory grounds applies (purposes no longer necessary, consent withdrawn, successful objection, unlawful processing). Crucially, Article 17(3) establishes five mandatory exceptions where erasure must be denied.

6 Erasure Triggers (Art. 17.1) 5 Statutory Exceptions (Art. 17.3)
1. Data no longer necessary in relation to purposes. 1. Exercising the right of freedom of expression and information.
2. Consent is withdrawn and no other legal basis exists. 2. Compliance with a statutory legal obligation (tax, accounting).
3. Objection to processing under Art. 21 and no overriding interests. 3. Reasons of public interest in the area of public health.
4. Personal data have been unlawfully processed. 4. Archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research.
5. Necessary for compliance with a legal obligation. 5. Establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims.
6. Data collected in relation to the offer of information society services to children (Art. 8.1). —
⚡ Key Takeaways
  • Where data was made public, the controller must inform downstream controllers of the erasure request (Art. 17.2).
  • Invoices, accounting ledgers, and signed contracts cannot be erased prior to statutory limitation periods.
  • Search engine delisting (Google Spain) removes index links without requiring source website destruction.
⚠️ Common Pitfall

Deleting financial billing history upon user request, which causes direct non-compliance with tax and accounting laws.

🛠️ In Practice

Configure a two-step deletion workflow that distinguishes immediate operational deletion from statutory legal archiving.

⚖️ Official Sources: Art. 17 GDPR · Recitals 65, 66 · CJEU C-131/12 Google Spain · CJEU C-507/17 Google v CNIL ✓ Legal review: 23 August 2026

✓ Key takeaways

  • Applicable under exhaustive triggers in Art. 17(1) (consent withdrawn, purpose expired, unlawful processing).
  • Does not apply where processing is necessary under the 5 exception categories of Art. 17(3) (legal obligation, defense of claims).
  • Search engine dereferencing and source host deletion are distinct legal mechanisms (Google Spain, C-131/12).

⚠ Common pitfall: Treating the right to erasure as an absolute right, failing to verify whether statutory retention duties (e.g. tax laws) mandate continued storage.

→ Actionable practice: Systematically screen incoming erasure requests against statutory retention mandates and limitation periods before proceeding with deletion.

← Right to Rectification & Third-Party Notification (Art. 16 & 19) Right to Restriction of Processing (Art. 18) →