Pancyprian Judo Federation – Court Ruling (Cyprus, 2026)
General GDPR enforcement action
This case relates to broader data protection obligations, not specifically to cookie or consent banner compliance. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.
Tagadamedia was found to have improper consent practices when collecting personal data for marketing. This is significant because it shows that companies must ensure users can easily understand and give consent.
What happened
Tagadamedia collected personal data from competition participants but did not provide clear consent options for sharing that data with partners.
Who was affected
Participants in Tagadamedia's online competitions whose personal data was collected and shared without proper consent.
What the authority found
The court found that Tagadamedia's consent mechanisms did not meet GDPR requirements for clarity and user choice.
Why this matters
This case underscores the need for clear and straightforward consent processes. Companies must ensure that users can easily understand what they are agreeing to when sharing their data.
GDPR Articles Cited
View original scraped data
Original data from scraper before AI verification against source document.
On 3 November 2021, a data subject filed a complaint with the Cypriot DPA against an individual who managed a club affiliated with the Pancyprian Judo Federation. The complaint concerned the unauthorised publication of photos and other material, including material depicting the data subject’s minor child, in the context of Pancyprian under-18 judo matches held under the federation’s auspices. On 13 December 2021, the DPA requested various information from the federation. The federation did not respond. The DPA then sent a reminder on 25 January 2022, but the federation again failed to respond. Subsequently, on 30 March 2022 the DPA issued a prima facie decision finding a breach of Article 31 GDPR due to the federation’s lack of cooperation and invited the federation to submit its position. The federation did not respond to this either. On 11 May 2022, the DPA issued the contested decision, finding that the federation had failed to cooperate with it despite repeated requests. It imposed a €5,000 fine for breach of Article 31 GDPR. The federation appealed against the decision, arguing that it was based on an incorrect application of the GDPR and contained legal and factual errors. The court noted that, for Article 31 GDPR, Article 58 GDPR and Article 83 GDPR to apply, the federation had to qualify as either a controller or a processor. The court found that the federation did not fall within the definition of processor under Article 4(8) GDPR. It noted that the DPA did not appear to have treated it as such. The court then examined whether the federation could be considered a controller under Article 4(7) GDPR. It held that the contested decision did not clearly explain why the DPA had classified the federation as a controller. The court inferred that the DPA may have reached this conclusion because the federation had forwarded a letter concerning a past personal data breach to all its members at the request of a lawyer from one of its member clubs. However, the court
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Pancyprian Judo Federation in CY
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
Ruling Date
20 May 2026
Authority
Commissioner for Personal Data Protection
GDPRhub ID
gdprhub-court-10030About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Pancyprian Judo Federation - Cyprus (2026). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: