Court case W292 2301229-1 – Court Ruling (Austria, 2025)

Court Ruling
DPA BVwG28 March 2025Austria
final
ePrivacy
Court Ruling

A court in Austria ruled that a credit reporting agency failed to erase a person's payment history data when it should have. This decision is important because it emphasizes the right to have personal data deleted when it's no longer needed.

What happened

The court found that the credit reporting agency did not delete a person's payment history data related to an out-of-court settlement.

Who was affected

The person whose payment history data was incorrectly retained by the credit reporting agency.

What the authority found

The court decided that the agency violated the person's right to erasure under GDPR by not deleting the data.

Why this matters

This ruling highlights the importance of data deletion rights and sets a precedent for similar cases. Companies must ensure they delete personal data when it is no longer necessary.

GDPR Articles Cited

AI-verified

Art. 17(GDPR)
Art. 4(4) GDPR
Art. 5(1)(a) GDPR
Art. 6(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 15(1)(h) GDPR
Art. 22(1) GDPR
Art. 22(2) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 4(4) GDPR
Art. 5(1)(a) GDPR
Art. 6(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 15(1)(h) GDPR
Art. 17(GDPR)
Art. 22(1) GDPR
Art. 22(2) GDPR

Original data from scraper before AI verification against source document.

Decision AuthorityBVwG
Source verified 11 April 2026
articles corrected
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

In 2024, a data subject filed a complaint to the DPA regarding the right to erasure of stored payment history data. The controller, a credit reporting agency, updated the data subject’s credit score following an out of court proceedings in 2019. The data subject’s request for a loan was rejected on the basis that banks received the information “Score value 0 - no calculation possible” when requesting information about the data subject. This value was an error as a result of the controller not being able to correctly assign a numerical value to the out of court proceedings. The entries analysed by the DPA and Court were the ones on the completion of out of court settlement and “Score value 0: No calculation possible”. In its decision, the DPA applied the reasoning of CJEU case law (the SCHUFA case) to conclude that the processing of payment history also constitutes a serious interference with the fundamental right to privacy and data protection ([https://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf Articles 7 and 8 CFREU]). The DPA then applied national law on time limits in processing of data related to insolvency procedures, arguing that the controller should have deleted the data relating to the out of court settlement. By not deleting this information the controller was violating the data subject's right to erasure under Article 17 GDPR. The controller disputed the DPA's reasoning and brought an appeal to the Federal Administrative Court. The controller argued that the SCHUFA case did not apply, because it related to publicly accessible data. It also claimed that the data processing was not a serious interference with the data subject's fundamental rights. The Court upheld the decision on the DPA regarding automated processing, but dismissed the reasoning on processing of payment history. The Court upheld the arguments of the controller, and stated that the facts of the current case differ in essential elements to SCHUFA. The Court conclud

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case W292 2301229-1 in AT

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

Details

Ruling Date

28 March 2025

Authority

DPA BVwG

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case W292 2301229-1 - Austria (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: