In our October 2019 Newsletter, we mentioned the entry into force of the provisions of the Act on counteracting money laundering and financing of terrorism regarding the creation of the Central Register of Beneficial Owners and the obligation to register beneficiaries of commercial companies in the register.

So far, anyone interested has had access to CRBR, but this may change after the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU of November 22, 2022 in joined cases C-37/20 | Luxembourg Business Registers and C-601/20.

The CJEU judgment concerned the case of two companies registered in Luxembourg, which demanded the restriction of access to data on their beneficial owners, arguing that open, unrestricted access to such information exposes them to a disproportionate risk of kidnapping related to, for example, kidnapping, blackmail or intimidation.

In its judgment, the Court of Justice of the EU, sitting as a Grand Chamber, annulled, in the light of the Charter, the provision of the Anti-Money Laundering Directive, which provides that Member States shall ensure that information on the beneficial owners of corporate entities and other legal entities established on their territory were in all cases made available to any person.

In the Court’s opinion, public access to information on beneficial owners constitutes a serious interference with the 1 Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council (EU) No 648/2012 and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC as amended by Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018.

The disclosed information enables a potentially unlimited number of people to obtain information on the material and financial situation of the beneficial owner.

Moreover, the potentially serious consequences for the persons concerned resulting from the possible misuse of their personal data are exacerbated by the fact that, once made publicly available, these data can not only be freely consulted, but also stored and disseminated.

The Court observed that, by the measure at issue, the EU legislature aims to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing by creating, by means of increased transparency, an environment in which it is less likely to be used for those purposes. It considered that the legislature was thus pursuing an objective of general interest capable of justifying interferences, even substantial ones, with the fundamental rights laid down in Article 1 of the EC Treaty. 7 and 8 of the Charter, and that public access to information on beneficial owners may contribute to this objective.

The above judgment of the CJEU means that EU countries (including Poland) will probably have to restrict access to the register.