Facts
Parties involved: A. (appellant), [B. SA], [C.], Data Protection and Information Rights Authority of the Canton of Vaud (APDI), District Court of the Côte, Administrative and Public Law Chamber of the Vaud Cantonal Court (CDAP).
Facts:
- In the context of a civil proceeding between [B. SA] and [C.], the examining judge ordered the production of documents concerning [A.], husband of [C.], by the cantonal administration. The documents were produced in November 2022.
- [A.] filed a complaint with the APDI against the transmission of the documents. The APDI declared the complaint inadmissible, considering that the cantonal law on the protection of personal data (LPrD) did not apply to civil and criminal proceedings.
- The CDAP confirmed this decision, ruling that art. 156 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) allowed the court to order measures necessary to protect the interests of third parties.
- [A.] then filed a public law appeal with the Federal Court, requesting the annulment of the cantonal decision and the referral of the case to the APDI for substantive examination.
Considerations
The appellant argues that the challenged decision violates the guarantee of access to justice under art. 29a of the Constitution. He contends that material acts of the administration, such as the transmission of information, are subject to this guarantee and require a full review of their legality.
The Federal Court recalls that art. 29a of the Constitution gives every person the right to have their case heard by a judicial authority with full power to review the facts and the law. This standard extends judicial review to all matters, including acts of the administration. However, this right to judicial review exists within the framework of the applicable rules of procedure and does not prohibit making the admissibility of a complaint or action dependent on the fulfillment of the usual conditions of admissibility.
Art. 156 CPC allows the court to order measures to prevent the administration of evidence from infringing…