Key facts of the case:
(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic))
(Approximation of laws — Processing of personal data — Directive 95/46/EC — Scope — Exceptions — Article 3(2) — Meaning of ‘in the course of a purely personal or household activity’ — Use of a surveillance camera to record footage of the entrance to the recording system operator’s home, a public space and the entrance to the house opposite)
Results (sanctions) and key consequences of the case:
68. In the light of the foregoing considerations, I propose that the Court state as follows in answer to the question referred for a preliminary ruling by the Nejvyšší správní soud:
The operation of a camera system installed on a family home for the protection of the property, health and life of the owners of the home, but which also monitors a public space, cannot be regarded as the processing of personal data by a natural person in the course of a purely personal or household activity for the purposes of Article 3(2) of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data.