On 9 November 2026, the Constitutional Court of Latvia delivered its judgment in Case No. 2024-01-01, ruling that unrestricted public access to the personal data of joint-stock company shareholders is incompatible with Article 96 of the Latvian Constitution (Satversme). The judgment represents a significant victory for the shareholders represented by COBALT and reinforces the standards of personal data protection in Latvia.
The case arose from a constitutional complaint lodged by 17 shareholders challenging legislation that allowed anyone to obtain shareholders’ personal data, including their personal identification numbers and addresses, without having to justify their request. This information was publicly accessible through the Latvian Register of Enterprises, including by means of bulk downloads. The applicants argued that such disclosure disproportionately interfered with their right to respect for private life and exposed them to the risk of misuse of their personal data.
During the proceedings, the Constitutional Court referred questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for a preliminary ruling. In its judgment of 3 September 2026 in Case C-798/24, Jautiva, the CJEU upheld the legal position advanced by the applicants, finding that EU law does not require the disclosure of personal data relating to all shareholders of joint-stock companies. Furthermore, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) precludes national legislation providing for the unrestricted disclosure of such data to the general public without any conditions governing access, such as a requirement to demonstrate a legitimate interest.
The Constitutional Court concluded that corporate transparency, the prevention of money laundering and compliance with sanctions are legitimate objectives, but that achieving them does not require unrestricted public access to all shareholders’ personal data. Access to the relevant information is already available to authorities and persons who require it to discharge their statutory obligations. In other circumstances, the information may be disclosed upon a duly reasoned request, thereby striking a proportionate balance between the public interest and the protection of fundamental rights.
The Constitutional Court extended the scope of its review beyond the provision originally challenged by the applicants. It also examined the closely related provision governing public access to the shareholders’ register itself. The Court found both provisions unconstitutional insofar as they required the disclosure of the shareholders’ register and the personal data of individual shareholders contained in it. The provisions ceased to have effect on that extent on the date of publication of the judgment, 9 November 2026.
Of particular significance, the Constitutional Court declared the contested provisions invalid with retroactive effect from 1 July 2023 in respect of the applicants, the date on which the interference with their fundamental rights began.
Commenting on the judgment, Lauris Liepa, Managing Partner of COBALT Latvia said: “This judgment is a significant victory not only for our clients, but for the protection of shareholders’ rights more broadly. From the outset, we maintained that corporate transparency and personal data protection are not mutually exclusive objectives. Information must be accessible to those who need it for legitimate purposes, but this does not justify unrestricted access to individuals’ personal data, such as their identification numbers and addresses. It is particularly important that both the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Constitutional Court have endorsed this approach, establishing a clear standard for the protection of fundamental rights.”
The judgment has wider implications for Latvia’s business and regulatory environment. It reinforces the principle that access to information held in commercial registers must be proportionate and that the processing of personal data must serve specific, legitimate purposes. At the same time, it confirms that corporate transparency and public security can be safeguarded without imposing disproportionate restrictions on individuals’ right to privacy.
The shareholders’ interests before the Constitutional Court of Latvia and the Court of Justice of the European Union were represented by COBALT Managing Partner Lauris Liepa and Head of the Administrative and Criminal Litigation Practice Group Gabriela Šantare.
The Constitutional Court’s judgment is final and not subject to appeal.
Leading experts
