HUNGARY Law and Practice Contributed by: Adam Liber and Tamás Bereczki, PROVARIS Varga & Partners
and operates a regulatory sandbox, providing opportunities for the preliminary testing of artifi - cial intelligence developments. Additionally, the Resolution provides that the Hungarian Artificial Intelligence Council will be established, with members delegated by the NAIH, as well as the NMHH (National Media and Infocommunica - tions Authority), MNB (Hungarian National Bank), GVH (Hungarian Competition Authority), SZTFH (Supervisory Authority for Regulated Activities), and DMÜ Zrt. (Digital Government Agency). The Council may issue guidelines and opinions regarding the implementation of the Regulation. The Bill No T/10011 was submitted to the Hun - garian Parliament by the Hungarian government on 19 November 2024, proposing measures necessary for implementing the European Par - liament and Council Regulation on artificial intel - ligence. This draft law aimed to designate the Hungarian Minister of Justice as the authority responsible for ensuring the protection of funda - mental rights in connection with the implemen - tation of Article 77 of the AI Act. However, the legislative proposal was later withdrawn before reaching the Parliamentary Legislative Com - mittee upon the recommendation of members of the governing party, without any justification being provided for the withdrawal. 1.6 Interplay Between AI and Data Protection Regulations The intersection of AI regulation and data pro - tection laws in Hungary reflects the broader European Union regulatory framework, primar - ily shaped by the GDPR and the EU’s AI Act. These two frameworks aim to address differ - ent aspects of technological innovation but are closely interlinked, particularly when AI systems process personal data. The NAIH is the primary body overseeing GDPR compliance in Hungary. Although the NAIH will likely play an advisory
role in AI regulation, the implementation of the AI Act is set to involve a specialised organisa - tion under the supervision of the Minister for the National Economy or the Minister of Justice, as outlined in Hungary’s recent governmental deci - sions. This suggests a separation of oversight responsibilities between general data protection and AI-specific risks.
2. Privacy Litigation 2.1 General Overview
In Hungarian legal proceedings, specific stand - ards for alleging data protection violations are not defined, but adherence to the established evidentiary rules in procedural legislation is required. Litigation often incorporates a vari - ety of evidence, including documents, witness statements, and expert insights. The Information Act enables individuals to initiate private legal actions against data controllers or processors for violating data protection laws. 2.2 Recent Case Law Under Section 2:52 of the Hungarian Civil Code, individuals whose personality rights have been infringed may claim grievance awards ( sérelem - díj ) for non-pecuniary damages. The law pre - sumes that harm occurs automatically when a violation is established, eliminating the need for claimants to prove actual damage. Courts can determine the amount of the award in a lump sum, considering the severity of the infringe - ment, its recurrence, the degree of fault, and the impact on the claimant and their environ - ment. The Budapest Court of Appeal in case Pf.20300/2024/7 emphasised the distinct nature of the sanctioning systems under the Hungarian Civil Code and the Information Act. It held that a violation of data protection regulations does not automatically amount to an infringement
169 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook