{"id":435,"date":"2026-07-04T18:08:20","date_gmt":"2026-07-04T18:08:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/?p=435"},"modified":"2026-07-04T18:12:49","modified_gmt":"2026-07-04T18:12:49","slug":"dun-bradstreet-austria-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/dun-bradstreet-austria-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Dun & Bradstreet Austria"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"ai_generated_summary":"","wpai_meta_description":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"affected_subject":[74,76],"country":[86],"judicial_forum":[98],"relevant_legal_instruments_artic":[94,92,93,97,96],"rights_involved":[],"thematica_area":[42,52],"class_list":["post-435","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","affected_subject-digital-users-online-communities","affected_subject-general-public","country-austria","judicial_forum-court-of-justice-of-the-european-union","relevant_legal_instruments_artic-article-121-transparent-and-intelligible-information-secondary","relevant_legal_instruments_artic-article-151h-meaningful-information-about-automated-decision-making-central","relevant_legal_instruments_artic-article-22-automated-individual-decision-making-including-profiling-central","relevant_legal_instruments_artic-article-47-effective-remedy-secondary","relevant_legal_instruments_artic-article-8-protection-of-personal-data-central","thematica_area-ai_surveillance_digital_rights","thematica_area-corporate_accountability_business"],"acf":{"observation_unit":["Judicial Decision"],"role_in_the_chilling_effect":"Judicial Response","linked_records":"","country":[86],"geographic_area":["Europe","European Union","Council of Europe Area"],"year":2025,"event_date":"20250227","last_updated":null,"thematic_area":[42,52],"measure_type":["Protective Judicial Decision"],"pressure_actor":"Court Judiciary","affected_subjects":[74,76],"rights_involved":false,"relevant_legal_instruments_and_articles":[97,96,94,92,93],"record_status":"Decided","case_outcome":"Measure Annulled or Limited","outcome_description":"The Court of Justice clarified that, in automated decision-making and profiling, the controller must provide meaningful information about the logic involved in a way that allows the data subject to understand which personal data were used and how they were used. The Court also held that the mere communication of an algorithm is not sufficient and that alleged trade secrets must be assessed by a competent authority or court through a balancing exercise. For the CHILL Barometer, the judgment reduces chilling pressure by making automated credit scoring more contestable and less opaque.","judicial_response":"Court Limits the Measure","judicial_forum":[98],"main_source":"main_source: https:\/\/infocuria.curia.europa.eu\/tabs\/redirect\/juris\/liste.jsf?num=C-203\/22","secondary_sources":"","source_type":[84],"source_reliability":100,"overview":"Dun & Bradstreet Austria concerns a CJEU preliminary ruling on automated creditworthiness assessment and the right of access under the GDPR. The dispute arose after a mobile telephone operator refused to conclude a contract with a customer because her credit standing was considered insufficient, relying on an automated assessment produced by Dun & Bradstreet Austria. The central issue was whether the data subject was entitled to meaningful information about the logic involved in the automated decision-making process, despite claims that the relevant information could involve trade secrets or third-party data. The Court held that the controller must explain the procedure and principles actually applied in a way that allows the data subject to understand which personal data were used and how. For the CHILL Atlas, the judgment is relevant because opaque scoring systems can discipline behaviour, restrict access to services and discourage individuals from challenging automated decisions. The decision reduces chilling pressure by strengthening explanation, transparency and contestability in automated credit scoring.","barometer_status":"Complete Assessment","barometer_scope":"Judicial Response Assessment","effect_on_chilling_pressure":"Reduces Pressure","chilling_effect_level":"Very High","measure_intensity":0,"legal_uncertainty":"0","sanctioning_risk":0,"breadth_of_affected_subjects":0,"vulnerability_of_affected_subjects":0,"documented_deterrent_effect":0,"public_visibility_exemplary_effect":0,"replicability_of_the_measure":0,"surveillance_or_data_collection":0,"procedural_safeguards":5,"protective_judicial_response":5,"corrective_or_mitigating_effect":4,"barometer_source_reliability":5,"total_barometer_score":76,"barometer_confidence":"High","barometer_notes":"This assessment measures the protective impact of the CJEU judgment, not the restrictive intensity of the underlying automated credit scoring system. Restrictive indicators are set to 0 because the opaque scoring practice should be assessed in a separate linked record. The judgment reduces chilling pressure by strengthening the data subject\u2019s right to meaningful explanation and by preventing trade secrets from operating as a blanket barrier to access. The score is very high because the procedural safeguards and judicial protection are strong, the source reliability is very high, and the ruling is generalisable to similar automated decision-making and credit scoring contexts.","presence_of_ai":"Yes","role_of_ai":["Risk Scoring"],"automation_level":"High","human_oversight":"Unknown","data_type_used":"Behavioural Data","ai_act_relevance":"High","environmental_context":[],"economic_actor_involved":[],"corporate_accountability_connection":["Not Assessed"],"aarhus_convention_connection":["Not Assessed"],"enable_chill_scoring":true,"record_direction":false,"scoring_record_type":false,"case_family_id":"","linked_restrictive_measure":null,"linked_corrective_decision":null,"evidence_confidence":"medium","coercive_severity":0,"protected_activity_nexus":0,"reach_replicability":0,"deterrence_visibility":0,"duration_and_persistence":0,"vulnerability_power_asymmetry":0,"ai__data_opacity":0,"remedy_strength":0,"rights_based_reasoning":0,"generalizability_precedent":0,"implementation_compliance":0,"procedural_safeguards_created":0,"timeliness":0,"watchdog_vulnerable_protection":0,"linkage_multiplier":1,"implementation_multiplier":1,"safeguards_reducing_chilling_pressure":[],"manual_safeguard_deduction":0,"pressure_cap":100,"protection_cap":100,"enable_manual_score_override":false,"chilling_pressure_score_raw":0,"chilling_pressure_score_final":0,"protective_correction_score_raw":0,"effective_protection_score":0,"final_chill_score":0,"final_score_label":false,"score_explanation":"","main_evidence_for_score":"","scoring_uncertainty":false,"scoring_version":"low : Low uncertainty medium : Medium uncertainty high : High uncertainty","last_scoring_review":null},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/435","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=435"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/435\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":438,"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/435\/revisions\/438"}],"acf:term":[{"embeddable":true,"taxonomy":"category","href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories\/84"},{"embeddable":true,"taxonomy":"judicial_forum","href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/judicial_forum\/98"},{"embeddable":true,"taxonomy":"relevant_legal_instruments_artic","href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/relevant_legal_instruments_artic\/93"},{"embeddable":true,"taxonomy":"relevant_legal_instruments_artic","href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/relevant_legal_instruments_artic\/92"},{"embeddable":true,"taxonomy":"relevant_legal_instruments_artic","href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/relevant_legal_instruments_artic\/94"},{"embeddable":true,"taxonomy":"relevant_legal_instruments_artic","href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/relevant_legal_instruments_artic\/96"},{"embeddable":true,"taxonomy":"relevant_legal_instruments_artic","href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/relevant_legal_instruments_artic\/97"},{"embeddable":true,"taxonomy":"affected_subject","href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/affected_subject\/76"},{"embeddable":true,"taxonomy":"affected_subject","href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/affected_subject\/74"},{"embeddable":true,"taxonomy":"thematica_area","href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/thematica_area\/52"},{"embeddable":true,"taxonomy":"thematica_area","href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/thematica_area\/42"},{"embeddable":true,"taxonomy":"country","href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/country\/86"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=435"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=435"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=435"},{"taxonomy":"affected_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/affected_subject?post=435"},{"taxonomy":"country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/country?post=435"},{"taxonomy":"judicial_forum","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/judicial_forum?post=435"},{"taxonomy":"relevant_legal_instruments_artic","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/relevant_legal_instruments_artic?post=435"},{"taxonomy":"rights_involved","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/rights_involved?post=435"},{"taxonomy":"thematica_area","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chill-lab.eu\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/thematica_area?post=435"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}