11. EMBLEMATIC 

In principle, it is to be seen that there is still no specific legal norm in Spain, regarding the right to be forgotten. So we have that:

The articulation of the Right to be Forgotten, which is not yet expressly regulated, arises with the damage caused by the trace of information on the Internet. This has led to a long conflict between the Spanish Agency for Data Protection (AEPD) and Google, which after 11 years of battle over claims and requests for Guardianship of citizens, it seems that it is now clarified.

The Google Case begins when:

(…)Mario Costeja González, who in 2010 went to the Spanish Data Protection Agency (AEPD) to make a claim against the publisher of the newspaper La Vanguardia, Google Spain and Google Inc. According to Costeja, entering his name in the Google's search engine showed, among other things, links to two pages of La Vanguardia published in January and March 1998, where the auction of a property of his was announced due to the debt he had with social security at the time. Costeja asked the AEPD that La Vanguardia eliminate those pages or modify them in such a way that his name no longer appears. He also asked that Google not include the links to those two pages among the results referring to his person. He argued that the auction announcements due to delinquency were no longer relevant, since their initial purpose, to attract buyers, it had ceased to exist and, in addition, the debt was paid. The AEPD rejected Costeja's claim against La Vanguardia, but it did consider it correct to accept the request in relation to Google Spain and Google Inc., for which it demanded that these companies not associate Costeja's name to the two pages with the advertisement of the auction. Google Spain and Google Inc., in turn, appealed to the National High Court to annul the AEPD resolution. And, precisely, the National High Court addresses a request to the Court of Justice of the European Union to rule on the matter by interpreting Directive 95/46/EC, whose article 12 states that a person can request that their personal data be erased once once they are no longer needed The AEPD rejected Costeja's claim against La Vanguardia, but it did consider it correct to accept the request in relation to Google Spain and Google Inc., for which it demanded that these companies not associate Costeja's name to the two pages with the advertisement of the auction. Google Spain and Google Inc., in turn, appealed to the National High Court to annul the AEPD resolution. And, precisely, the National High Court addresses a request to the Court of Justice of the European Union to rule on the matter by interpreting Directive 95/46/EC, whose article 12 states that a person can request that their personal data be erased once once they are no longer needed diritto all'oblio caso. The AEPD rejected Costeja's claim against La Vanguardia, but it did consider it correct to accept the request in relation to Google Spain and Google Inc., for which it demanded that these companies not associate Costeja's name to the two pages with the advertisement of the auction. Google Spain and Google Inc., in turn, appealed to the National High Court to annul the AEPD resolution. And, precisely, the National High Court addresses a request to the Court of Justice of the European Union to rule on the matter by interpreting Directive 95/46/EC, whose article 12 states that a person can request that their personal data be erased once once they are no longer needed for which he demanded that these companies not associate the name of Costeja to the two pages with the announcement of the auction. Google Spain and Google Inc., in turn, appealed to the National High Court to annul the AEPD resolution. And, precisely, the National High Court addresses a request to the Court of Justice of the European Union to rule on the matter by interpreting Directive 95/46/EC, whose article 12 states that a person can request that their personal data be erased once once they are no longer needed for which he demanded that these companies not associate the name of Costeja to the two pages with the announcement of the auction. Google Spain and Google Inc., in turn, appealed to the National High Court to annul the AEPD resolution. And, precisely, the National High Court addresses a request to the Court of Justice of the European Union to rule on the matter by interpreting Directive 95/46/EC, whose article 12 states that a person can request that their personal data be erased once once they are no longer needed .

Next, regarding the Google case, we will briefly refer to what CÁMARA PELLÓN reported:

In this new and changing reality, in which there seem to be no  written laws , the already famous Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of May 13, 2104 has broken in, in which Google has been sentenced to  unlink  the results obtained in the searches carried out with the personal data of a Spanish citizen, who when typing his name in the search engine, saw published and available to Internet users, the announcements of some auctions held in front of him for debts with Social Security .

Regarding the position of the Luxembourg Court, continues CÁMARA,

(...) has a great transcendence and for that reason has provoked an unprecedented media following. In the first place, the Judgment proclaims that the activity of finding information with personal data, ordering it, storing it and making it available to Internet users is considered to be the  processing of personal data  for legal purposes. Secondly, the High Court attributes the consideration of the  true controller of this data processing to the search engine, to the extent that it is he who determines the purposes and means of this activity. Finally, the Court protects the citizen's right to have the results obtained on the network that are harmful be  unlinked  from their data, which has been generally called the right to be forgotten  .