Banking Scoring versus Social Scoring: the Chinese Model in the Light of the Court of Justice of the European Union
Banking Scoring versus Social Scoring: the Chinese Model in the Light of the Court of Justice of the European Union

Summary/Abstract: The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) recently concluded that the scoring performed for the approval of a loan falls under Article 22 of the GDPR, consisting of a decision based exclusively on automatic processing. The current study proposes a comparative analysis between banking scoring, from the perspective of the recent decision of the CJEU, considered as a decision based exclusively on the automatic processing of personal data, and social scoring – the Chinese social model, already functional in China. If from the point of view of bank scoring, as a general rule, the data subject has the right not to be subject to such a decision, except in the situation where, among other things, he gives his express consent to this, in the case of scoring socially, things are completely different. At the same time, if, in particular, when we talk about the insolvency of the natural person, the private entities that are in charge of calculating these scores for bank clients cannot store the data for longer periods than the legal ones established for public registers; in the case of social scoring, things are different again. At first sight we may wonder why an association between these two apparently different types of scoring. The study proposes a comparative analysis starting from the model applied in the case of cryptocurrencies, which used computer software applications. Later they were developed, generalized, being used in the creation and development of artificial intelligence. This is why there can also be a connection between these two types of scoring, which affect fundamental human rights and freedoms if they are applied without correct adaptation to concrete factual and legal situations.

• Details
• Contents