Google LLC – Complaint Upheld (Austria, 2025)
Google LLC faced a complaint for not providing complete information to a user about their data after an access request. This matters because it reinforces users' rights to know how their data is being used.
What happened
Google did not fully inform a user about the data processed through cookies and other tracking tools after they requested access.
Who was affected
A user who requested information about their personal data processed by Google.
What the authority found
The Datenschutzbehörde upheld the complaint, emphasizing Google's obligation to provide complete information under GDPR.
Why this matters
This ruling highlights the importance of transparency and user rights in data processing. Companies must ensure they provide clear and complete information to users about their data.
View original scraped data
Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.
Source checks
Secondary-source text retrieved.
Automated check recorded — 13 April 2026.
Processing notes: scope corrected.
Retrieved text may be a secondary summary or an announcement. These automated statuses do not establish that the original decision was read or that the record received an independent legal review. How we check sources
A data subject, represented by noyb, brought a complaint against Google LLC (the controller) in January 2019. According to the data subject, the controller did not provide them with complete information following an access request for the YouTube service; instead, the controller provided limited information through a download portal, which excluded information the controller stated it would process in accordance with its privacy policy. For example, the data provided did contain information on the data processed through cookies or Facebook pixels. The DPA initiated the One-Stop Shop procedure and forwarded the case to the Irish DPA, who also believed it should be considered the lead DPA for the proceedings. However, the Irish DPA ultimately declared it was not responsible in 2022, and referred the case back to the DPA. The controller argued that the data subject had incorrectly initiated proceedings against them, as it was not the controller within the meaning of the GDPR. In addition, it argued that the data subject had received complete information and that its DPO was not responsible. The DPA first emphasised the importance of the right to access (Article 15 GDPR), as it enables the data subject to verify whether a controller is processing personal data lawfully. In addition, Article 12(2) GDPR places an obligation on controllers to facilitate data subjects in exercising their rights. The DPA then dismissed the controller’s argument to reject the complaint, as Google LLC was the controller at the time the case was filed with the DPA. Furthermore, the DPA stated that it would have not dismissed the case even if the data subject had not chosen an entirely accurate name for the controller; it was clear that the data subject wanted to prosecute the entity responsible for the YouTube service. The DPO was considered responsible for handling the complaint, as the Irish branch was not considered the controller for YouTube. The DPA found a violation of Article 12(1
Outcome
Complaint Upheld
A data subject complaint that was upheld by the DPA.
Violations (1)
Third-party tracking cookies or scripts are loaded without obtaining prior user consent.
Art. 13, 14 GDPR
Related Enforcement Actions (1)
Other enforcement actions involving Google LLC in AT
Similar Cases
Enforcement actions with similar violations
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Google LLC - Austria (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: