Ex-employee (data subject) – Court Ruling (Germany, 2023)
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 German court ruled that an ex-employee's claim for damages against their former employer was dismissed because the employer's delayed response to a data access request didn't count as processing personal data. This matters because it clarifies that simply not responding on time doesn't lead to compensation under data protection laws. Businesses should ensure they respond promptly and completely to data requests to avoid similar issues.
What happened
An ex-employee claimed their former employer failed to provide timely and complete information about their personal data.
Who was affected
The ex-employee who requested access to their personal data under GDPR.
What the authority found
The court decided that a delayed response does not qualify as unlawful processing of data, thus no compensation was warranted.
Why this matters
This ruling highlights that companies must actively process data correctly to trigger compensation claims. It serves as a reminder for businesses to improve their data handling practices.
GDPR Articles Cited
View original scraped data
Original data from scraper before AI verification against source document.
The data subject was employed by the controller in December 2016. In October 2022, the data subject requested access to their personal data under Article 15 GDPR, which the controller complied with. The data subject then sent another request and set a deadline until 16 October 2022. The controller did not respond by that date, and after multiple reminders and new deadlines, it provided a response that was delayed and incomplete, missing data on storage duration and recipients. The controller later supplemented the information by early December 2022. The data subject claimed that the controller violated its Article 15 GDPR duties by failing to provide timely and complete information, causing immaterial harm (loss of control over data). They sought compensation under Article 82 GDPR. In the previous decision, the lower court awarded €10,000. The controller appealed the decision. First, the court held that a delayed or initially incomplete data access response does not constitute “data processing” as defined in Article 4(2) GDPR. It pointed out that a missed or belated answer is not an active processing act but “non-processing” of data, and thus cannot trigger compensation under Article 82 GDPR, which requires an actual unlawful processing breach. The court also held that an immaterial damage claim must be tied to concrete harmful processing. Generalized assertions like “loss of control” or “frustration” are insufficient and must be proven. As a result, the court amended the first-instance decision and dismissed the data subject’s claim for non-material damages. Revision (appeal) to the Federal Labour Court was permitted.
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (1)
Other cases involving Ex-employee (data subject) in DE
Details
Ruling Date
28 November 2023
Authority
DPA AGDuisburg
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Ex-employee (data subject) - Germany (2023). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: