Luxembourg is considering a new criminal offence targeting the automated profiling of judges and court clerks using personal data contained in court decisions. Draft bill no. 8721 was introduced on 20 March 2026 but has not been adopted, and no prohibition currently applies.
What is proposed?
The proposed Article 141-1 of the Criminal Code would prohibit the direct or indirect reuse of such data to evaluate, analyse, compare or predict the actual or perceived professional practices of judges or court clerks.
As currently drafted, it would:
- cover direct and indirect reuse, including database cross-referencing, statistical inference and intermediate processing;
- extend to court clerks where their data could be used as a proxy for a judge;
- expose individuals to one month to two years’ imprisonment and fines of EUR251 to EUR45,000; and
- expose legal entities to fines of EUR1,250 to EUR2.5 million.
The proposed offence targets judge-specific profiling. General litigation analytics that do not use personal data to assess the individual professional practices of judges or court clerks would remain outside its scope as drafted.
Why is the outcome uncertain?
In its opinion of 10 July 2026, the Council of State (Conseil d’État) questioned whether the measure is proportionate. It highlighted Luxembourg’s limited number of courts, frequent collegiate decision-making and the absence of comparable criminal provisions outside France. It also questioned why the French restriction had been transposed without simultaneously enshrining the accompanying principle of public access to judicial decisions. Although it did not formally oppose the profiling provision, it reserved its position on dispensing with the second constitutional vote pending further explanations.
Practical takeaway
The proposed specific criminal prohibition is not currently in force in Luxembourg. The bill remains before Parliament and may be revised in response to the Conseil d’État’s concerns. Litigation-analytics providers should nevertheless monitor its development carefully. Depending on the final wording, providers using Luxembourg judgments to generate judge-specific assessments or predictions may need to review or redesign the relevant functionalities, while general, non-judge-specific analytics should in principle remain outside the prohibition. DLA Piper will keep you informed of any relevant updates as the parliamentary process progresses. In the meantime, please feel free to reach out to DLA Piper in case of questions.
Authors:
- Olivier Reisch, DLA Piper
- Amin Bouazza, DLA Piper
