Claim LD12-HQ-C08 (v1.0)
The CJEU held in C-203/22 that an automated-decision subject is entitled under GDPR to meaningful information about the procedure and principles actually applied; merely handing over a complex formula or algorithm is insufficient.
Research opportunities this claim motivates
What this claim leaves open for research. Each is a hypothesis about a gap, not a finding.
- How often do people use GDPR rights over automated decisions, and what happens?The Court of Justice set what people are entitled to receive (meaningful information about the procedure and principles actually applied; handing over a complex formula or algorithm is not enough), but the claim explicitly does not show common use, low burden or successful remedies.
Provenance and status
- Claim type
- FACT (as printed: “FACT”)
- Publication status
- ELIGIBLE (as printed: “ELIGIBLE”)
- Verification state
- CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY (as printed: “CONTENT VERIFIED”; verified by: UNKNOWN)
- Does not license
- Common use, low procedural burden or successful remedy rates
- Source (field 6, as printed)
- CJEU C-203/22, ECLI:EU:C:2025:117
- Source type (field 7)
- COURT_DECISION_PRIMARY (as printed: “Court decision primary”)
- Institutional position
- EU judiciary
- Maturity (claim evidence / publication maturity)
- MATURE (as printed: “MATURE”)
- Recorded date
- 2026-09-25
- Currentness / correction
- This is the current version. No correction or concern relation is recorded on its Sources.
Version
Current version v1.0, resolved through the explicit current pointer CLAIM--LD12-HQ-C08.
Pinned Sources (field 6, version-specific)
- “CJEU C-203/22, ECLI:EU:C:2025:117” → SRC-LD12-CJEU-C203-22-2025--v1.0 — CJEU C-203/22, ECLI:EU:C:2025:117; class COURT_DECISION_PRIMARY (explicit public provenance pin)
Read the originals
- SRC-LD12-CJEU-C203-22-2025: open the original
All 25 canonical Claim fields (raw values and normalized values)
| # | Canonical field | Canonical value (verbatim) | Normalized (Claim Value Vocabulary v1.0.2) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CLAIM ID | LD12-HQ-C08 | — |
| 2 | PUBLIC-FACING CLAIM | The CJEU held in C-203/22 that an automated-decision subject is entitled under GDPR to meaningful information about the procedure and principles actually applied; merely handing over a complex formula or algorithm is insufficient. | — |
| 3 | CLAIM TYPE | FACT | base_types: FACT |
| 4 | RESEARCH STRAND | C — Rights/remedies | — |
| 5 | MATURITY | MATURE | states: MATURE |
| 6 | SOURCE | CJEU C-203/22, ECLI:EU:C:2025:117 | source_ids: SRC-LD12-CJEU-C203-22-2025 |
| 7 | SOURCE TYPE | Court decision primary | classes: COURT_DECISION_PRIMARY |
| 8 | INSTITUTIONAL POSITION | EU judiciary | — |
| 9 | SCOPE | GDPR automated credit scoring; EU/Austria | — |
| 10 | DESIGN | Legal adjudication | — |
| 11 | SAMPLE / DATASET | Preliminary reference | — |
| 12 | MODEL / TOOL / VERSION | Credit-scoring system | — |
| 13 | COMPARATOR | Controller disclosure | — |
| 14 | MAIN RESULT | Meaningful intelligible explanation standard; confidentiality interests require authority/court balancing. | — |
| 15 | INFERENTIAL TARGET | Content of a formal explanation right | — |
| 16 | DOES NOT LICENSE | Common use, low procedural burden or successful remedy rates | — |
| 17 | VERIFICATION STATE | CONTENT VERIFIED | state: CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY · verified_by: UNKNOWN |
| 18 | LIMITATIONS | Single legal dispute; population uptake unknown | — |
| 19 | CONTRADICTORY / SUPPORTING SOURCES | GDPR doctrine provides stronger realized rights evidence than future AI Act high-risk provisions | — |
| 20 | GEOGRAPHY / LANGUAGE | EU/Austria / multilingual official judgment | — |
| 21 | DISTRIBUTIONAL LEDGER | Litigation burden may advantage well-resourced claimants; incidence unmeasured | — |
| 22 | R01 / FIELD-MAP LINKS | D6.4, D5, D4a, L-A | — |
| 23 | WHAT WOULD CHANGE THIS CLAIM? | DPA/court use-rate and remedy-outcome data | — |
| 24 | PUBLICATION STATUS | ELIGIBLE | state: ELIGIBLE |
| 25 | RECORDED DATE | 2026-09-25 | — |
Field 22 references resolved against Field Map v0.2: D6.4 (SUB_AREA); D5 (DOMAIN); D4a (SUB_AREA); L-A (LENS)
Cited by Living Debate versions
Research-of-record provenance
Materialized by sociolens-materializer 0.6.0 at 2026-09-28T20:00:00.000Z; normalization contract SocioLens — Claim Value Vocabulary v1.0.2 — Pre-Spike Materialization Contract (v1.0.2). Content seal SHA-256 643850f195aa8f06c984fed9dcebd126ff6d6a2b450c879759a9a4f1089d63fd.
Frozen Drive-derived inputs
- R08 — LD-12 Canonical Claim Ledger v1.0 — LOCKED (v1.0) — Drive ID
1sdIAYxbpV_VV6_xzqmFgCPwej0RadgAopFLRC9iZH5Y; revision: NOT_EXPOSED_BY_DRIVE_TEXT_EXPORT; Drive modified 2026-09-26T06:41:13.718Z; block “ENTRY 08 — LD12-HQ-C08” SHA-256f02d270e8dd6e33af09f977819575fd4a9b9369d145a14e8630cc93088afa852; SocioLens — Programme Status & Authority Register v0.6 status “CURRENT.”; frozen fixturefixtures/frozen/r08-ld12-claim-ledger-v1.0. - SocioLens — Proof Source Registry v0.4 (v0.4) — Drive ID
1_-GLmj6PfetWDQH2KldMv-61vmSmzdAyyxgZZZCFnbE; revision: NOT_EXPOSED_BY_DRIVE_TEXT_EXPORT; Drive modified 2026-09-27T19:04:00.374Z; block “REGISTRY ENTRY SRC-LD12-CJEU-C203-22-2025” SHA-25627489143d0ec7f53eea06ccdcc2ad9ca6db0e4be31bc20ab308f2321d4e0c6de; SocioLens — Programme Status & Authority Register v0.6 status “CURRENT PROOF SOURCE REGISTRY.”; frozen fixturefixtures/frozen/proof-source-registry-v0.4.
Builder decisions (not Drive data)
- VERSION = v1.0 — basis: Claim version taken from the canonical ledger artifact version (R08 — LD-12 Canonical Claim Ledger v1.0); Implementation Architecture Selection §5 logical_id/version convention.
- CURRENT_POINTER = true — basis: SocioLens — Programme Status & Authority Register v0.6 status for "R08 — LD-12 Canonical Claim Ledger v1.0 — LOCKED": "CURRENT."
- FIELD_6_SOURCE_REFERENCE = SRC-LD12-CJEU-C203-22-2025--v1.0 — basis: field 6 of ENTRY 08 — LD12-HQ-C08 cites "CJEU C-203/22, ECLI:EU:C:2025:117"; Builder identification: the cited work is Proof Source Registry v0.4 identity SRC-LD12-CJEU-C203-22-2025 (canonical label "CJEU C-203/22, ECLI:EU:C:2025:117"), Registry-linked to this logical Claim; SocioLens record v1.0 is its sole record.
- SOURCE_PROVENANCE_PIN = SRC-LD12-CJEU-C203-22-2025--v1.0 — basis: Issue #5 proof rendering (Architecture Proof Protocol v0.1 AP-08 / Amendment v1.2 §6): explicit version-pinned public provenance of this ClaimVersion — the pinned field-6 Source record.