Naming, shaming and data protection on the podium: the court of justice’s judgment in Nada Austria (c-474/24) on the online publication of anti-doping sanctions

On 14 July 2026 the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice delivered its judgment in NADA Austria and Others, clarifying, for the first time in the context of organised sport, the interplay between the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) and the online publication of the names of athletes sanctioned for anti-doping rule violations. The Court held that : (i) such publication falls within the material scope of EU data protection law, (ii) the information published is not, as a rule, “data concerning health”, (iii) a general statutory duty to publish may be compatible with the principle of proportionality provided an individual balancing exercise remains available outside the situations expressly excluded by national law, (iv) anti-doping offences are not “offences” within the meaning of Article 10 of the GDPR, and (v) a complaint under Article 77 may be lodged pre-emptively where publication is imminent. This article sets out the factual and legal background to the reference, analyses each of the Court’s answers. It then offers a critical assessment of their implications for the future design of anti-doping publication regimes across the Member States, read against the backdrop of the markedly divergent Opinions previously delivered by Advocates General 􀃻􀁄􀁓􀁈􀁗􀁄 and Spielmann.