CNIL – Court Ruling (France, 2022)

Court Ruling
Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés28 January 2022France
final
ePrivacy
Court Ruling

A French court ruled that Google failed to get user consent before placing cookies on their devices. This decision highlights the importance of respecting user privacy and consent, which is crucial for online businesses.

What happened

Google placed advertising cookies on users' devices without obtaining their consent.

Who was affected

Internet users in France whose devices had Google cookies installed without their permission.

What the authority found

The court found that Google did not comply with the French Data Protection Act, which requires user consent for cookie placement.

Why this matters

This ruling emphasizes that companies must prioritize user consent when using tracking technologies. Online businesses should ensure they have clear mechanisms for obtaining consent before using cookies.

National Law Articles

AI-identified

Art. 82 Loi Informatique et Libertes
Decision AuthorityCouncil of State
Reviewed AuthorityCNIL

Entities Involved

Google LLC
€50,000,000
(controller)
Google Ireland Ltd
€50,000,000
(controller)
Source verified 11 April 2026
articles corrected
national law identified
entity split needed
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

On 7 December 2020, the French DPA (CNIL) imposed two fines totaling € 100 million on Google LLC and Google Ireland Ltd for violating Article 82 of the French Data Protection Act (which transposes the ePrivacy Directive). Google (1) had not obtained the user’s consent before depositing advertising cookies in the user’s terminal equipment, (2) had lacked to provide information, and (3) had not implemented a mechanism to refuse the cookies. Google did not agree with the CNIL’s decision and brought the issue before court. First, it claimed that, since there is cross-border processing, the Irish DPA (DPC) is the lead supervisory authority since Google’s main establishment in the EU is in Ireland, and the CNIL therefore did not have competence to rule on this matter according to the one-stop-shop mechanism. Second, it found the fine to be disproportionate. Hence, it requested the Council of State to annul the decision, and to refer two preliminary questions to the CJEU, asking: (1) whether the one-stop-shop mechanism provided for in Article 56 GDPR is excluded in the context of cross-border processing that falls within the scope of both the ePrivacy Directive and the GDPR, and (2) whether Article 15a ePrivacy Directive violates the right to data protection because does not provide an obligation, but rather an option, “for the competent national regulatory authorities to adopt measures to ensure effective cross-border cooperation in the enforcement of national laws adopted pursuant to the directive and to create harmonised conditions for the provision of services involving cross-border data flows”. The Council of State rejected Google’s appeal. First, according to the Council, the ePrivacy Directive, implemented in the French Data Protection Act, does not provide for the application of the one-stop-shop mechanism as mentioned in Article 56 GDPR. Although the requirements for consent are regulated by the GDPR the deposit of cookies is regulated by the ePrivacy Direct

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Violations (4)

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

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

Details

Ruling Date

28 January 2022

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. CNIL - France (2022). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: