GDPR Art. 15(1)(h): access to meaningful information about the logic involved

On request, confirm automated decision-making and give meaningful information about the logic involved and its significance and envisaged consequences

By Jorge García Aibar Reviewed 2026-09-24

Text alternative

Clause: GDPR, Art. 15.
Duty holder: Controller.
Applies from: 2018-05-25, In force.
Artefact: Per-request explanation generated….
Layers: Layer 04, Layer 05.
Evidence record: Evidence record v1.
Record schema: Evidence record.
The same topic in 13 other frameworks; the crosswalk section below links each clause.

When this obligation applies The first date in the row's status, then each later step: filled once its date has passed, outlined while it is still ahead of the review date.

Data table: the dates

Dates of AIGE-OBL-GDPR-ART15-1H
Date	Step	Detail
2018-05-25	In force

Id: AIGE-OBL-GDPR-ART15-1H
Instrument: General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679 law
Clause: Art. 15(1)(h)
In scope: Controller
Authority: National data protection authority
Applies from: 2018-05-25 In force

The artefact that evidences it

Per-request explanation generated from the decision record; system-level automated-decision notice.

What this obligation connects to Solid edges are direct relations, dashed ones looser (a case that cites the same article, a framework whose clauses only touch the topic); patterns and controls take the colour of their stack layer. Select a node to open it; the lists below give every relation in full.

Data table: every relation

Relations of AIGE-OBL-GDPR-ART15-1H
Family	Item	Relation
Patterns	Decision Notice & Contest Path	Direct
Patterns	Explanation Artefact	Direct
Same crosswalk topic	AI Verify 2.2.1, 1.1.4	Core clause
Same crosswalk topic	CSA AICM GRC-13, GRC-14	Core clause
Same crosswalk topic	EU AI Act Art. 86, Art. 13(3)(b)(iv)–(v)	Core clause
Same crosswalk topic	Korea AI Act Art. 34(1)(2)	Core clause
Same crosswalk topic	NIST AI RMF MEASURE 2.9, MEASURE 2.8	Core clause
Same crosswalk topic	OECD AI Principles OECD 1.3	Core clause
Same crosswalk topic	UK DUAA UK GDPR Art. 22C	Core clause
Same crosswalk topic	China Algo. Rec. AlgoRec Art. 17	Related clause
Same crosswalk topic	CoE Convention CoE Art. 14(2)	Related clause
Same crosswalk topic	GDPR Art. 13(2)(f), Art. 22(3)	Related clause
Same crosswalk topic	ISO 42001 A.8.2	Related clause
Same crosswalk topic	Singapore GenAI GenAI 3	Related clause
Same crosswalk topic	UK ATRS ATRS 2.3.5	Related clause

Patterns that build it

Explanation Artefact (layer 4 and 5)
Decision Notice & Contest Path (layer 4 and 5)

The same topic in other frameworks

From the topic crosswalk: the clauses filed under the same topics as this one. Mappings are illustrative, not a claim of conformity.

Explainability and right to explanation

EU AI Act Art. 86 Right to explanation of individual decision-making (core)
EU AI Act Art. 13(3)(b)(iv)–(v) Information relevant to explain output; performance for specific persons or groups (core)
NIST AI RMF MEASURE 2.9 MEASURE 2.9: The AI model is explained, validated, and documented, and AI system output is interpreted within its context as identified in the MAP function to inform responsible use and governance (core)
CSA AICM GRC-13 Explainability Requirement (core)
CSA AICM GRC-14 Explainability Evaluation (core)
Korea AI Act Art. 34(1)(2) Explanation plan: result, main criteria, training-data overview (core)
UK DUAA UK GDPR Art. 22C Safeguards for automated decision-making (core)
OECD AI Principles OECD 1.3 Transparency and explainability (core)
AI Verify 2.2.1 Explainability: document the rationale and trade-offs of a less explainable model and apply explainable AI techniques (core)
AI Verify 1.1.4 Transparency: tell people using or affected by the system the factors behind a decision and that it was made wholly or partly by an automated system (core)
GDPR Art. 13(2)(f) Existence of automated decision-making
GDPR Art. 22(3) Right to obtain human intervention and to contest the decision
ISO 42001 A.8.2 System documentation and information for users (clause not verified)
NIST AI RMF MEASURE 2.8 MEASURE 2.8: Risks associated with transparency and accountability as identified in the MAP function are examined and documented
UK ATRS ATRS 2.3.5 Appeals and review
Singapore GenAI GenAI 3 Trusted Development and Deployment
CoE Convention CoE Art. 14(2) Documentation sufficient to contest decisions; complaint to authorities
China Algo. Rec. AlgoRec Art. 17 Explain where an algorithm significantly affects user rights

Source

Chapter 08, section The GDPR, checked against its sources on the review date above.

Machine-readable

This obligation: /api/v1/obligations/aige-obl-gdpr-art15-1h.json
The register: /api/v1/obligations.json · CSV
Schema and stability promise: open data and API

Cite this obligation

García Aibar, J. (2026). GDPR Art. 15(1)(h): access to meaningful information about the logic involved (AIGE-OBL-GDPR-ART15-1H). In AI Governance Engineering: The Thesis & Body of Knowledge (v0.5.0). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22956197. https://aigovernanceengineer.com/obligations/aige-obl-gdpr-art15-1h. CC BY 4.0

BibTeX

@misc{aige2026obligation,
  author       = {Jorge García Aibar},
  title        = {{GDPR Art. 15(1)(h): access to meaningful information about the logic involved (AIGE-OBL-GDPR-ART15-1H)}},
  howpublished = {In AI Governance Engineering: The Thesis \& Body of Knowledge},
  year         = {2026},
  version      = {0.5.0},
  doi          = {10.5281/zenodo.22956197},
  url          = {https://aigovernanceengineer.com/obligations/aige-obl-gdpr-art15-1h},
  note         = {Version 0.5.0}
}