Google LLC – Court Ruling (France, 2021)

Court Ruling
Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés4 March 2021France
final
ePrivacy
Court Ruling

A French court ruled that Google did not provide clear information about its cookie practices, which is important for user consent. Although no fine was imposed in this ruling, it reinforces the need for transparency in how companies handle user data. Website operators should ensure their cookie policies are easy to understand.

What happened

Google failed to provide clear information and valid consent options regarding cookies on its French website.

Who was affected

Website visitors who used Google’s services in France were affected by the unclear cookie practices.

What the authority found

The court held that Google did not comply with the ePrivacy Directive's requirements for cookie consent and transparency.

Why this matters

This ruling highlights the importance of clear cookie policies and consent mechanisms for all website operators. It sets a precedent that companies must be transparent about their data practices.

National Law Articles

AI-identified

Art. 82 Loi Informatique et Libertés
Decision AuthorityConseil d’État
Reviewed AuthorityCNIL

Entities Involved

Google LLC
€60,000,000
(controller)
Google Ireland Limited
€40,000,000
(controller)
Source verified 9 April 2026
articles corrected
national law identified
amount discrepancy
entity split needed
authority corrected
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

On December, 7 2020, the French DPA imposed a financial penalty of 60 Million euros fine against Google LLC and a 40 million euros against Google Ireland Limited in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and ePrivacy Directive, for lack of transparency, inadequate information and lack of valid consent regarding for violating the regulation on cookies while operating the website [https://google.fr google.fr]. The sanction was accompanied by an order to comply with [https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/article_lc/LEGIARTI000037813978 article 82 of the French Law on data protection] (Law Informatique et Libertés), under three months on penalty of a €100000 fine per day of delay. The companies appealed to the Conseil d’État in interim procedure against the CNIL's decision, arguing that the French DPA was not the competent authority because it was not the lead supervisory authority for Google LLC or Google Ireland Limited. Is the CNIL territorially competent to investigate and sanction a company for violating the information principle when depositing cookies if it is not the lead supervisory authority of the company? The CNIL considered that Google does have EU headquarters in Ireland, but that this Irish entity ‘did not have a decision making power’ in relation to the relevant cross-border data processing activities to which the complaints related. For that reason the CNIL decided that the One Stop Shop mechanism did not apply and that the CNIL, like any other European supervisory authority, was therefore competent to make a decision. The Conseil d’État rejected the request made by Google and ruled that the French DPA was territorially competent on this matter even though it is not the lead supervisory authority. The court stated that Article 82 of the Law Informatique et Libertés was a transposition of article 5(3) of the Directive 2002/58/CE into French Law when dealing with cookies and that the CNIL is charged with enforcing this Directive.

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Violations (6)

No Reject Button
critical

Cookie banner does not provide a clear reject/refuse all button at the same level as the accept button.

Art. 7 GDPR

Reject Harder Than Accept
critical

Refusing cookies requires more clicks or steps than accepting them, or the reject option is less visually prominent.

Art. 7 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

Misleading Banner Messaging
critical

The cookie banner uses misleading language to trick or pressure users into accepting cookies (dark patterns).

Art. 7 GDPR

Similar Cases

Enforcement actions with similar violations

Details

Ruling Date

4 March 2021

Authority

Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés

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. Google LLC - France (2021). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: