Brillen Rottler GmbH & Co. KG – CJEU Judgment (Germany, 2026)
CJEU judgment — not a DPA enforcement action
This is a Court of Justice ruling, not an enforcement action by a data protection authority. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.
The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on a case involving Brillen Rottler GmbH & Co. KG, where a customer was denied information about their data. This matters because it clarifies how companies should handle information requests from users. Companies can't refuse requests without valid reasons.
What happened
Brillen Rottler GmbH & Co. KG refused to provide information to a customer who requested it under data protection laws.
Who was affected
A customer who subscribed to the company's newsletter and requested information about their personal data.
What the authority found
The Court held that companies must provide information to users unless they have a valid reason to refuse.
Why this matters
This ruling sets a precedent for how companies must respond to information requests. Businesses should ensure they have clear policies to handle such requests to avoid legal issues.
GDPR Articles Cited
View original scraped data
Original data from scraper before AI verification against source document.
On 16 March 2023, the data subject (a private individual living in Vienna) subscribed to the ‘newsletter’ on the website of the controller (a family run optician company established in North Rhine-Westphalia) by entering his personal data in the registration form, confirming his consent to data processing by ticking a box and submitting the form. On 29 March 2023, the data subject sent by fax an information request pursuant to Article 15 GDPR. The controller acknowledged receipt of the request and stated that it would respond to it within the one-month period. However, by letter of 26 April 2023, the controller refused to provide the information since it classified the information request as an abuse of right for the purposes of the second sentence of Article 12(5)(b) GDPR. The controller sought a declaration from the referring court that the data subject is not entitled to compensation in the amount of €1000. The court decided to refer the following questions set out in point I. to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 267 TFEU: # Is the second sentence of Article 12(5) GDPR to be interpreted as meaning there cannot be an excessive information request from the data subject when the first request is made to the controller? # Is the second sentence of Article 12(5) GDPR to be interpreted as meaning that the controller can refuse an information request from the data subject if the data subject intends to use the information request to provoke claims for damages against the controller? # Is the second sentence of Article 12(5) GDPR to be interpreted as meaning that grounds for refusing to provide information can be provided by publicly available information about the data subject which suggests that the data subject is asserting claims for damages against the controller in a large number of cases of infringement of the law relating to the protection of personal data? # Is Article 4(2) GDPR to be interpreted as meaning that an information request from a
Outcome
CJEU Judgment
A judgment by the Court of Justice of the European Union, typically on a preliminary reference from a national court.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Brillen Rottler GmbH & Co. KG in DE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
Judgment Date
1 January 2026
Authority
Court of Justice of the European Union
GDPRhub ID
gdprhub-cjeu-8916About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Brillen Rottler GmbH & Co. KG - Germany (2026). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: