On 13 March 2025, the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered its judgment in Case C-247/23 (Deldits). The case concerned the interpretation of Article 16 of the GDPR and questions regarding the right of transgender persons to have information about their gender corrected in public registers, as well as the requirements that may be imposed on documentation in such cases.
Case Background
The case concerned an Iranian citizen, VP, who had been granted refugee status in Hungary in 2014 on the basis of his identity as a transgender person. In support of his application for refugee status, VP had submitted medical certificates stating that VP had a male gender identity but was born as a woman. After VP’s refugee status was recognised, VP was nevertheless registered as a woman in the asylum register.
Hungarian legislation does not provide for any procedure for changing legal gender. VP therefore based his request to change his gender in the asylum register on Article 16 of the GDPR, which establishes a right to have inaccurate personal data about oneself corrected. However, the asylum authority rejected the request on the grounds that VP had not proven that he had undergone gender confirmation surgery and that the medical certificates submitted only confirmed VP’s identity as a transgender person.
Hungary’s lack of procedures for changing legal gender and the asylum authority’s decision to reject the request to correct personal data led VP to bring a case claiming that the asylum authority had to reverse its decision.
In connection with VP’s lawsuit, the court of first instance in Hungary referred three questions to the European Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:
- Does Article 16 of the GDPR impose an obligation on national authorities that maintain public registers to correct information about a person’s gender when that information is inaccurate, in accordance with the principle of accuracy in Article 5(1)(d) of the GDPR?
- If so, should Article 16 of the GDPR be interpreted to mean that the person requesting the rectification of information about their gender must provide documentation justifying the request for rectification?
- In that case, should Article 16 of the GDPR be interpreted as meaning that the person requesting the correction of information about their gender must prove that they have undergone gender confirmation surgery?
The European Court of Justice’s assessments
On the first question, the Court concluded that Article 16 of the GDPR requires national authorities to correct information on gender in public registers if it is inaccurate, in accordance with the principle of accuracy in Article 5(1)(d) of the GDPR.
The Court emphasised that the principle of accuracy means that personal data must be correct and up to date in accordance with the purpose of the processing. In this case, the purpose of the information in the asylum register was to identify the individual, and therefore the information had to reflect the individual’s lived gender identity, not necessarily their birth gender.
Furthermore, the Court pointed out that although Member States have the power to regulate the legal recognition of gender reassignment, they must comply with EU law. National legislation that prevents a transgender person from exercising a right protected by EU law is considered incompatible with EU law.
In the second and third questions, the Court concluded that the authorities may require relevant and sufficient documentation in order to assess whether the information in the registers is incorrect, but at the same time pointed out that such documentation requirements must be reasonable. A Member State cannot make the exercise of the right to rectify personal data conditional on the presentation of evidence of gender confirmation surgery, at least not through purely administrative practice.
The Court pointed out that any restriction on the right to rectify personal data must be in accordance with Article 23 of the GDPR, which means, among other things, that the restrictions must be based on national legislation. Furthermore, the Court pointed out that the Hungarian asylum authority’s practice of requiring proof of gender confirmation surgery violated the fundamental rights to personal integrity and respect for private life, which are protected by both Articles 3 and 7 of the EU Charter and Article 8 of the ECHR.
The Court also emphasised that a requirement to prove that gender confirmation surgery has been performed is, in any case, neither necessary nor proportionate to ensure the reliability and consistency of a public register such as the asylum register.
The judgment contains statements that elaborate on the content of the “right to rectify”, both in terms of what it means for information to be inaccurate and therefore subject to rectification, and in terms of the requirements for documentation being necessary and proportionate. In addition, the judgment shows how privacy rules, which are an operationalisation of the right to privacy protected by both the European Convention on Human Rights and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, can have concrete significance for vulnerable groups.
