by Maria Sole Montagna and Fulvio Sarzana of S. Ippolito, Lawyers, Sarzana Law Firm and Associates
In summary. The Milan Court has ordered Google to change its handling of de-indexing requests: forms must allow for attachments of documents, and each refusal must be justified based on the information submitted. The deadline for compliance is November 15, 2026. The reconstruction is based on the press release issued by the plaintiffs on October 5, 2026, not on the full text of the order.
The article by Maria Sole Montagna and Fulvio Sarzana, published on Digital Agenda on October 6, 2026, reconstructs the decision and indicates how to prepare a de-indexing request on Google.
The class action against Google
The action was filed in November 2025 by some members of the Algopolio association, along with other plaintiffs, against Google LLC, Google Ireland Limited, and Google Italy Srl. The plaintiffs challenged standardized and inadequately individualized procedures. The target included the mechanism by which users submit their case and receive a response, as well as the removal of individual results.
The instrument is the collective injunction action under Article 840-sexiesdecies of the Code of Civil Procedure, introduced by Law 31/2019. It seeks the cessation of conduct that harms multiple individuals. Unlike the class action for damages under Article 840-bis, it amends a procedure and does not award individual damages.
According to the press release, the Court rejected Google LLC's jurisdictional objection and issued the order against it as well. The reasons for Italian jurisdiction require a reading of the ruling.
What changes for de-indexing on Google
According to the statement, the Court imposed two actions on Google:
- modify procedures and forms to allow for the attachment of documents to support requests;
- motivate denials based on an evaluation of the documents presented, so that the interested party understands the reasons.
The deadline is November 15, 2026. The press release also mentions a financial penalty for each day of delay, without specifying the amount. The nature and method of application must be verified in the provision and should not be confused with an administrative penalty under the GDPR.
Users will be able to document requests and understand why a request was rejected. The outcome remains a matter of case-by-case balancing.
GDPR, balancing and EU precedents
Deindexing removes certain links from search engine results, particularly for searches related to the data subject's name. The original page remains online.
THE'’Article 17 of the GDPR, Article 1(c) provides for erasure when the data subject objects to processing pursuant to Article 21 and there are no overriding legitimate grounds. Article 3(a) safeguards freedom of expression and information. Therefore, in each specific case, the protection of the data subject is assessed against the public's interest in accessing the information.
Article 12 establishes a standard deadline of one month, extendable by another two months depending on the complexity and number of requests. The extension must be communicated within the first month. If the data controller does not comply with the request, they must explain the reasons and indicate the possibility of filing a complaint with the supervisory authority or seeking judicial remedy.
Three decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union address the issue:
- Google Spain (C-131/12, 13 May 2014): the search engine operator is the data controller and may be required to de-index links even when publication on the original page is lawful;
- GC and others (C-136/17, 24 September 2019): special categories of data and criminal proceedings require a specific assessment, taking into account the updated situation of the data subject;
- YOU and KING against Google (C-460/20, 8 December 2022): Anyone who bases the request on the inaccuracy of the information must provide relevant and sufficient elements, without first having to obtain a judicial decision against the publisher.
The latest ruling is closest to the issue of attachments: being able to produce documents matters when the outcome depends on the information provided by the interested party.
How to prepare a de-indexing request on Google
With the ability to attach documents, a clear file is needed, readable by those unfamiliar with the matter. The de-indexing request on Google should state:
- the exact URLs, including reposts and variations;
- the name and the searches under which the results appear;
- the reasons for the request and their connection with the GDPR requirements;
- relevant documents: rulings, archiving orders, corrections, decisions of the Guarantor;
- the elements for balancing: time elapsed, public role of the interested party, timeliness of the information, nature of the data;
- proof of sending and the responses received.
An acquittal does not automatically lead to de-indexing. However, it does impact the assessment of the accuracy, currency, and current interest in the news. For example, an acquitted professional provides links to articles about the investigation, attaches the acquittal with proof of finality, and explains whether the results paint an incomplete or out-of-date picture.
Generic requests without URLs or reasons should be avoided. It's a good idea to retain the documents submitted, proof of submission, and the response. A refusal that ignores the information presented can be challenged for lack of justification. The options available to the Data Protection Authority (Article 77 of the GDPR) and the court (Article 79) remain. For the same subject matter and the same parties, the alternative provision of Article 140-bis of the Privacy Code applies. The November 15 deadline does not preclude Google from changing the forms earlier.
The questions still open
There are three points left to verify.
- Implementation of the modules: how they will change, what documents can be submitted, how responses will be written.
- The degree of individualization: the press release, citing the defense attorneys, speaks of "individualized, non-automated" procedures. Without the text of the provision, this formulation cannot be interpreted as a general ban on automated support tools.
- Territorial scope: The press release attributes European relevance to the decision, but this alone does not mean that the order applies equally to all users in the Union. This issue is separate from the geographical scope of the de-indexing decided in Google vs. CNIL (C-507/17, 24 September 2019).
The effectiveness of the right to be forgotten also depends on the ability to present one's case in its entirety and understand why a request is rejected. On this topic, see also the in-depth analysis of the study on right to be forgotten and de-indexing and on the right to be forgotten.
Frequently Asked Questions About Google Deindexing
According to the plaintiffs' statement of October 5, 2026, the Court granted a class action injunction: Google must allow documents to be attached to de-indexing requests and justify any denials based on the documents submitted.
The deadline for compliance is November 15, 2026. Google may introduce changes even before that date. The announcement mentions a financial penalty for each day of delay, without specifying the amount.
No. It removes certain links from search engine results, particularly for searches related to the data subject's name. The original page remains online.
It doesn't automatically lead to de-indexing. However, it does count when evaluating the accuracy, currency, and current interest of the news item, provided it is accompanied by proof of irrevocability.
Retain the documents submitted, proof of submission, and the response. A denial that ignores the information presented may be challenged for lack of justification. The options available are to file a complaint with the Data Protection Authority (Article 77 of the GDPR) and to appeal to a judge (Article 79), with the alternative of Article 140-bis of the Privacy Code.
Article 12 of the GDPR establishes a standard deadline of one month, extendable by another two months depending on the complexity and number of requests. The extension must be communicated within the first month, along with the reasons.
For the complete analysis, please refer to’article on Digital Agenda.
English 
Italian 