Rossel Group (sudinfo) – €50,000 Fine (Belgium, 2022)

€50,000Autorité de Protection des Données16 June 2022Belgium
final
Fine

Rossel Group, the owner of several Belgian media websites, was fined for placing cookies on users' devices without their consent. The authority found that they used pre-ticked boxes and made it hard for users to withdraw consent. This ruling emphasizes the need for clear and proper consent mechanisms for cookie usage on websites.

What happened

Rossel Group was fined EUR 50,000 for placing non-essential cookies on users' devices before obtaining their consent.

Who was affected

Website visitors who accessed Rossel Group's media sites and had their browsing tracked by cookies were affected.

What the authority found

The Belgian data protection authority ruled that the company violated GDPR by not obtaining valid consent for cookie placement.

Why this matters

This ruling highlights the importance of obtaining clear consent from users before placing cookies. Website operators should review their cookie policies to ensure compliance.

GDPR Articles Cited

AI-verified

Art. 13(GDPR)
Art. 14(GDPR)
Art. 6(1)(a) GDPR
Art. 7(1) GDPR
Art. 7(3) GDPR
Art. 12(1) GDPR
Art. 4(11) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 4(11) GDPR
Art. 6(1)(a) GDPR
Art. 7(1) GDPR
Art. 7(3) GDPR
Art. 12(1) GDPR
Art. 13(GDPR)
Art. 14(GDPR)

Original data from scraper before AI verification against source document.

Entities Involved

Rossel Group (sudinfo)
Rossel Group (le soir)
Rossel & Cie
Source verified 4 April 2026
verified correct
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

On 16 January 2019, the executive-committee of the Belgian DPA (GBA) started an investigation on the placement of cookies on Belgian media websites. The controller is Rossel & Cie, the owner of the websites of Le Soir, Sudinfo and Sudpresse éditions digitales. The investigation revealed the following potential violations. First of all, the placement of cookies that were not strictly necessary - including statistical and social-network cookies - prior to consent of the data subject. The controller does not dispute this. However, it argues that the method used for the investigation was not reliable to establish a violation. Furthermore, that the statistical cookies placed do not require prior consent. As for the social-network cookies, the controller argued that it had a legitimate interest for the processing activities. Second, the qualification of 'further browsing' as consent. The cookie-banner disappears if the user continues scrolling on the website. The controller argues that this is active behaviour that meets the active consent requirement of Planet 49. Third, pre-ticked boxes to grant consent for third-party-cookies. Forth, an incomplete and poorly accessible cookie policy. Sixth, unjustified retention periods for the storage of cookies. Lastly, revoking consent was impossible. The DPA held that the controller violated Article 6(1)(a) by placing not strictly necessary cookies without obtaining prior consent. The DPA noted that statistical cookies also require consent under the current legal framework. Furthermore, the controller did not provide any evidence for the legitimate interest regarding the social-network cookies. However, the DPA will take into account that the controller now (allegedly) has another legal basis for the social-network and analytical cookies. Regarding the qualification of 'further browsing' as consent, the DPA stated that this can be seen as active behaviour as referred to in Planet 49 in specific situations. However the act of

Violations (5)

Pre-ticked Consent Boxes
high

Cookie consent checkboxes are pre-selected by default, violating the requirement for active, affirmative consent.

Art. 4(11) GDPR

Cookies Placed Before Consent
critical

Non-essential cookies (tracking, advertising) are placed on the user's device before obtaining valid consent.

Art. 6(1) GDPR

Third-Party Cookies Without Consent
critical

Third-party tracking cookies or scripts are loaded without obtaining prior user consent.

Art. 13, 14 GDPR

Unclear Cookie Information
high

The cookie banner or cookie policy provides vague, incomplete, or unclear information about what cookies are used and why.

Art. 12, 13 GDPR

Cannot Withdraw Cookie Consent
critical

No accessible mechanism exists for users to withdraw previously given cookie consent.

Art. 7(3) GDPR

Related Enforcement Actions (0)

No other enforcement actions found for Rossel Group (sudinfo) in BE

This is the only recorded action for this entity in this jurisdiction.

Details

Fine Date

16 June 2022

Authority

Autorité de Protection des Données

Fine Amount

€50,000

GDPRhub ID

gdprhub-4999

About this data

Data: GDPRhub (noyb.eu)
Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
AI-verified and classified
Cookie relevance: 100%

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Rossel Group (sudinfo) - Belgium (2022). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: