- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Germany · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- Privacy topics
Court case 6 U 81/23 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2025)
A German court ruled that a company illegally tracked a user's online activity without consent. The court ordered the company to pay damages for the emotional distress caused by the unauthorized tracking. This case emphasizes the need for businesses to obtain clear consent before using tracking technologies.
What happened
The court found that the company processed a user's data for advertising without obtaining consent.
Who was affected
The user whose online activity was tracked without consent.
What the authority found
The court ruled that the company could not prove it had obtained valid consent for tracking and awarded damages to the user.
Why this matters
This ruling highlights the legal risks companies face when using tracking technologies without consent. It serves as a crucial reminder for businesses to implement robust consent mechanisms to protect user privacy.
View original scraped data
Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.
Source checks
Secondary-source text retrieved.
Review needed — 14 April 2026.
Processing notes: national law identified, amount discrepancy, authority 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
The controller placed cookies on the data subject’s terminal equipment and processed the resulting data for advertising purposes without obtaining the data subject’s consent. The personal data concerned included, in particular, the data subject’s IP address and a cookie identifier. The data subject brought an action before the Regional Court (LG Frankfurt), seeking an injunction and compensation for non-material damage. The controller argued that the data subject had knowingly triggered the processing and that the data were only processed in aggregated and pseudonymised form. The controller further contended that the data subject could have deleted the cookies from his device at any time. The Court rejected these arguments and granted an injunction and awarded damages of €1,500 to the data subject. The controller subsequently appealed the decision to the OLG Frankfurt. The Court partially upheld the lower court's decision. The court held that the controller could not rely on the fact that the data subject was technically able to delete cookies from his terminal equipment. The lawfulness of processing depends on the existence of valid prior consent, not on the data subject’s ability to mitigate the effects of unlawful processing after the fact. The Court further clarified that the burden of proof for demonstrating valid consent rests with the controller. Accordingly, the controller’s argument that the data subject had failed to show that he did not consent was dismissed as irrelevant. With regard to damages, the court found that the infringement did not result in a significant loss of control over personal data, as the data subject was aware of the processing and the personal data at issue (IP address and cookie ID) were not particularly sensitive. Nevertheless, the court held that the storage and processing of cookies for advertising purposes without consent gave rise to a feeling of being monitored, which amounted to non-material damage. Given that the impairment suffered by the data subject was minor, the Court considered an award of €100 in non-material damages under Article 82 GDPR to be appropriate.
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Violations (1)
Third-party tracking cookies or scripts are loaded without obtaining prior user consent.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Court case 6 U 81/23 in DE
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Similar Cases
Enforcement actions with similar violations
DPA case Takeaway B.V. - z2022-04011
2024 · Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
DPA case 9782890
2022 · Garante per la protezione dei dati personali
DPA case 11/2022
2022 · Autorité de Protection des Données
DPA case ZSPR.440.331.2019.PR.PAM
2021 · Urząd Ochrony Danych Osobowych
Court case 10 A 5385/22
2025 · DPA VGHannover
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 6 U 81/23 - Germany (2025). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: