GOOGLE LLC – Court Ruling (Netherlands, 2025)

Court Ruling
DPA RbDenHaag28 August 2025Netherlands
final
Court Ruling

General GDPR enforcement action

This case relates to broader data protection obligations, not specifically to cookie or consent banner compliance. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.

A Dutch entrepreneur asked Google to remove a link to an article that mentioned their past criminal conviction. The court decided that Google could keep the link because the entrepreneur didn't prove the information was inaccurate. This ruling highlights the balance between privacy and the public's right to know.

What happened

The court ruled that Google could keep a link to an article about a user's past criminal conviction in its search results.

Who was affected

The individual affected was a Dutch real estate entrepreneur whose criminal history was linked in search results.

What the authority found

The court found that Google had a valid reason to keep the information visible, as it was necessary for freedom of expression and information.

Why this matters

This case shows that search engines can prioritize public interest over individual privacy in certain situations. Website operators should be aware of how their content might impact users' reputations.

GDPR Articles Cited

AI-verified

Art. 10(GDPR)
Art. 17(GDPR)
Art. 21(GDPR)
View original scraped data
Art. 10(GDPR)
Art. 17(GDPR)
Art. 21(GDPR)

Original data from scraper before AI verification against source document.

Decision AuthorityRb. Den Haag
Source verified 21 March 2026
articles corrected
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The data subject was a Dutch real estate entrepreneur who was criminally convicted. Google (the controller) was the operator of the internet search engine Google Search. When the name of the data subject was searched on the controller's search engine, results included an URL that referred to an article, in which it was stated, among other things, that they had criminal convictions. The data subject filed a complaint against the publisher of the article with the Netherlands Press Council, and the Press Council rejected the complaint, ruling that the publication did not violate the data subject’s privacy rights. Also, the data subject sent multiple requests to the controller to remove the URL linking to the article, and the controller rejected all of these requests. Finally, the data subject asked the court to order the controller to remove the specific URL that links to this article from its search results when someone searches for their name. The data subject stated that the article contained old and inaccurate information, and that it was harmful for their reputation and their ability to do business. They also stated that there was no strict public need for these details to remain accessible, and the controller lacked overriding legitimate grounds for processing this data. The court rejected the data subject’s request to remove the URL from the controller, finding that they failed to prove that a substantial portion of the information was manifestly inaccurate. The court clarified that the processing of personal data by a search engine is justified under Article 6(1)(f) GDPR, and that Article 17 GDPR grants a right to erasure only if processing is incompatible with the GDPR. Article 17(3)(a) GDPR makes clear that the right to removal does not apply when processing is necessary for freedom of expression and information, requiring a balancing test between with the data subject’s right to privacy and data protection. Article 21 GDPR allows individuals to object

Outcome

Court Ruling

A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.

Details

Ruling Date

28 August 2025

Authority

DPA RbDenHaag

About this data

Data: GDPRhub (noyb.eu)
Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
AI-verified and classified

Cite as: Cookie Fines. GOOGLE LLC - Netherlands (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: