Article 15: Right of access by the data subjectAI-relevant
Praxikon tracks Article 15 (Right of access by the data subject) under the GDPR, alongside the EU AI Act, citing the source for every statement.
What does Article 15 govern?
Article 15 gives everyone the right to ask an organisation whether it processes personal data about them and, if so, to access those data. That access comes with explanation: the purposes, the categories of data, the recipients, the retention period, the data subject's rights, the right to complain, the source where the data did not come from the person, and the existence of automated decision-making with meaningful information about the logic (paragraph 1). For transfers to a country outside the EU, the data subject is told which safeguards apply (paragraph 2). The organisation provides a copy of the data; the first copy is free and an electronic request is answered in a commonly used electronic form (paragraph 3), without adversely affecting the rights of others (paragraph 4). The article exists because people can only verify whether processing is lawful when they know what has been recorded about them (recital 63).
Key term: Right of access: the right to learn whether your data are being processed and to receive a copy, together with an explanation of the why
Directly affects:controllerdata subject
Praxikon’s reading of the text and the recitals; the official text below prevails.
AI Act intersection
Right of access includes information about automated decision-making, which relates to AI Act transparency (Art. 13) and access to documentation (Art. 86).
Official text
Source: EUR-Lex, Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Official text, reproduced without modification.
What does this mean for you?
Controller
On request you confirm whether you process someone's data and then provide a copy with the information in paragraph 1: purposes, categories, recipients, retention period, rights, source and any automated decision-making, for example an AI system that assigns a score. The first copy is free; only for further copies may you charge a reasonable fee, and an electronic request is answered in a commonly used electronic form (paragraph 3). You verify the identity of the requester with reasonable measures (recital 64) and make sure the copy does not adversely affect the rights and freedoms of others (paragraph 4), without refusing all information for that reason (recital 63).
Data Subject
You can ask any organisation whether it processes data about you and, if so, which data, for what purpose and to whom they have been or will be disclosed (paragraph 1). You receive a copy, free of charge the first time, and in a commonly used electronic form if you asked electronically (paragraph 3). Where the organisation processes a large amount of information about you, it may ask you to specify what your request relates to (recital 63).
Compliance checklist
Related recitals
A data subject should have the right of access to personal data which have been collected concerning him or her, and to exercise that right easily and at reasonable intervals, in order to be aware of,...
(64)The controller should use all reasonable measures to verify the identity of a data subject who requests access, in particular in the context of online services and online identifiers. A controller sho...
Cross-references
Frequently asked questions
Connections
What connects to Article 15 GDPR
Themes where this returns
The counterpart in the other law
Case law
- Brillen Rottler: even a first access request can be abusive if made solely to claim compensation
2026-03-19 · final, Hof van Justitie van de EU (Vierde kamer), Brillen Rottler GmbH & Co. KG tegen TC
- Dun & Bradstreet: right to an intelligible explanation of an automated decision, trade secrets are no absolute ground for refusal
2025-02-27 · final, Hof van Justitie van de EU (Eerste kamer), CK tegen Magistrat der Stadt Wien, met Dun & Bradstreet Austria GmbH als andere partij
- SCHUFA: a credit score on which third parties draw strongly is automated decision-making
2023-12-07 · final, Hof van Justitie van de EU (Eerste kamer), OQ tegen Land Hessen, met SCHUFA Holding AG als interveniënt
- Council of State: DPA could fine DPG Media for routinely demanding ID copies, fine halved to 262,500 euros
2025-09-24 · final, Raad van State, Afdeling bestuursrechtspraak
Guidelines
- Dutch DPA (AP) publishes position paper on the Digital Omnibus and the AI Omnibus
2026-01-13 · final, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
- Guidelines on Automated individual decision-making and Profiling for the purposes of Regulation 2016/679
2018-05-25 · final, Article 29 Working Party, bekrachtigd door de European Data Protection Board (EDPB)
Enforcement and fines
- Netflix fined 4.75 million euros for failing to properly inform customers
2024-11-26 · under appeal, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
- Clearview AI: 30.5 million euro fine and penalty orders for illegal facial database
2024-05-16 · final, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
Legislation in motion
- Proposal: refusing requests that abuse the right of access (Article 12(5) GDPR)
2025-11-19 · proposal, Europese Commissie