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.

SocioLens project,

Claim LD12-HQ-C08 (v1.0)

Provenance and status

Claim type: Fact
Publication status: Eligible for publication
Verification state: Checked against the primary source. Who checked this claim is not recorded for it; claim checks so far were AI-led, and no person has checked claims against their sources.
Does not license: Common use, low procedural burden or successful remedy rates
Limitations: Single legal dispute; population uptake unknown
Source (as cited): CJEU C-203/22, ECLI:EU:C:2025:117
Source type: Court decision (recorded as “Court decision primary”)
Institutional position: EU judiciary
Maturity of the evidence: Mature evidence
Recorded date: 25 September 2026
Currentness / correction: This is the current version. No correction or concern is recorded on its sources.

Sources this version cites

CJEU C-203/22, ECLI:EU:C:2025:117 (Court decision)
Read the original

Version

This page shows version v1.0. Its record never changes, even when newer evidence arrives; the site may add a note to the page or withhold a figure not cleared for public use.

This pinned version is also the current version.

Versions: v1.0 · current

Raw record: every recorded field, with its coded values

All 25 canonical Claim fields, verbatim, with the coded values derived from them. The plain-language labels above are read from these.

Claim type (coded): FACT (as printed: “FACT”)
Publication status (coded): ELIGIBLE (as printed: “ELIGIBLE”)
Verification state (coded): CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY
Source type (coded): COURT_DECISION_PRIMARY
Maturity (coded): MATURE

#	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)

The sources as recorded, with their record IDs and coded source types:

Pinned Sources (field 6, version-specific)

“CJEU C-203/22, ECLI:EU:C:2025:117” → 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)

Cited by Living Debate versions

Regulation-in-Practice: Rights, Compliance & Developmental Steering (v0.1) LD-12

Cite this page

SocioLens project. (2026, September 25). 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 [Claim LD12-HQ-C08, version v1.0]. SocioLens. https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/claims/ld12-hq-c08/v1.0/

@misc{sociolens_ld12_hq_c08_v1_0,
  author = {{SocioLens project}},
  title = {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.},
  year = {2026},
  date = {2026-09-25},
  howpublished = {\url{https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/claims/ld12-hq-c08/v1.0/}},
  note = {Claim LD12-HQ-C08, version v1.0}
}

The link points to this version, whose record never changes. For a finding, cite the original study as well: SocioLens summarizes research and does not replace it.

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-256 f02d270e8dd6e33af09f977819575fd4a9b9369d145a14e8630cc93088afa852; SocioLens — Programme Status & Authority Register v0.6 status “CURRENT.”; frozen fixture fixtures/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-256 27489143d0ec7f53eea06ccdcc2ad9ca6db0e4be31bc20ab308f2321d4e0c6de; SocioLens — Programme Status & Authority Register v0.6 status “CURRENT PROOF SOURCE REGISTRY.”; frozen fixture fixtures/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.