The right to be forgotten is usually a right to have search results delisted — not a power to erase the original webpage from the internet.
Delisting Is Not the Same as Deleting the Source
Article 17 GDPR can provide a right to erasure in defined circumstances, but when the complaint is directed to a search engine, the practical remedy is often de-referencing: removing a link from results generated from searches of the person's name.
The underlying article or webpage may remain online. Search-engine delisting and removal of the source are separate legal questions.
When Can an Individual Ask a Search Engine to Delist a Result?
Relevant grounds can include data that is no longer necessary for the original purpose, unlawful processing, or information that is inaccurate. Search engines must also balance the individual's privacy rights against freedom of expression and the public's right to receive information.
There is therefore no blanket right to erase every embarrassing, negative or old article.
The CJEU's 2022 Google Judgment Is Especially Useful for Inaccurate Information
In Google (C-460/20), the Court held that a search engine must dereference information where the person requesting it proves that the information in the content is manifestly inaccurate. The Court said the proof does not necessarily have to come from a court judgment against the publisher.
Sensitive Personal Data Receives Special Treatment
In GC and Others (C-136/17), the CJEU held that the rules on special categories of personal data also apply to search engines and that a careful balance must be struck between the person's fundamental rights and the rights of internet users who may have an interest in the information.
How to Prepare a Stronger Delisting Request
- Identify the exact URL you want delisted.
- Identify the name or search query producing the result.
- Explain the legal ground: outdated, unnecessary, inaccurate, unlawful or another Article 17 basis.
- Provide evidence supporting the claim.
- Explain any current public-interest considerations if relevant.
- Keep the search engine's response.
"Defamation" Is Not the Same Thing as "GDPR Delisting"
A statement may be defamatory under national law without automatically meeting the requirements for Article 17 delisting. Conversely, a person may have a strong data-protection argument even where a defamation claim is unavailable.
Use the appropriate legal ground rather than relying on the word "defamation" alone.
If the Search Engine Refuses
You can complain to the competent supervisory authority and, depending on the circumstances, seek judicial review or another court remedy under national law. Keep the full application, supporting evidence and search engine response.
What This Means Practically
- Target the search result, not necessarily the source webpage.
- Use evidence, especially where alleging manifest inaccuracy.
- Expect a balancing exercise where public interest and freedom of expression are involved.
- Use Google, Bing or another engine's current privacy/delisting form.
- Escalate to the national data-protection authority or courts when appropriate.
Sources
- EUR-Lex — GDPR Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 17. eur-lex.europa.eu
- CJEU — Google, C-460/20, judgment of 8 December 2022. curia.europa.eu
- CJEU — GC and Others, C-136/17, judgment of 24 September 2019. curia.europa.eu
- Google — Remove personal information from Google Search. support.google.com