DSB (DPA) – Court Ruling (Austria, 2023)
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.
A complaint about a court judgment being shared improperly was partially dismissed by the Austrian data protection authority. This is significant because it underscores the importance of confidentiality in legal matters. Individuals must be aware that not all breaches of privacy will lead to action if they lack a legitimate interest.
What happened
The DPA dismissed a complaint regarding the improper sharing of a court judgment via email.
Who was affected
The individual whose court judgment was shared without proper anonymization was affected by this breach.
What the authority found
The DPA found that the individual did not have a legitimate interest for legal protection in this case, leading to the dismissal of the complaint.
Why this matters
This case illustrates the challenges individuals face in seeking redress for privacy breaches, particularly in legal contexts where confidentiality is crucial.
National Law Articles
On 4 October 2020, the controller sent a non-anonymised court judgement of the Regional Criminal Court (Landesgericht für Strafsachen) as a PDF file to a different recipient via WhatsApp. Less than a year later, on 28 July 2021, the same non-anonymised court judgement was sent to the same recipient again, this time via email. The data subject lodged two complaints with the DPA (DSB) regarding the violation of their right to secrecy under [https://ris.bka.gv.at/eli/bgbl/i/1999/165/A1P1/NOR40139563?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Kundmachungsorgan=&Index=&Titel=DSG&Gesetzesnummer=&VonArtikel=&BisArtikel=&VonParagraf=1&BisParagraf=&VonAnlage=&BisAnlage=&Typ=&Kundmachungsnummer=&Unterzeichnungsdatum=&FassungVom=05.07.2026&VonInkrafttretedatum=&BisInkrafttretedatum=&VonAusserkrafttretedatum=&BisAusserkrafttretedatum=&NormabschnittnummerKombination=Und&ImRisSeitVonDatum=&ImRisSeitBisDatum=&ImRisSeit=Undefined&ResultPageSize=100&Suchworte=&Position=1&SkipToDocumentPage=true&ResultFunctionToken=431b02ed-230a-4be2-a50e-f77708a2abbc § 1(1) DSG]. In the first proceedings (DSB-D124.5125), the DPA ruled on the transmission of the judgement via WhatsApp and notably highlighted that the transmission via email was not the subject of the proceedings. In the second procedure (DSB-D124.0310/22) concerning the transmission via email, the DPA dismissed the complaint on the grounds that the data subject had no legitimate interest of legal protection and referred to its first administrative decision. The data subject appealed against the second decision of the DPA and asked the court to decide in that subject matter. In their opinion, the two transmissions of the judgement at different times represent two separate data processing operations. First, the court held that, in this specific case, there was no identity of the subject matter in comparison with the first proceedings within the meaning of § 68(1) AVG. In accordance with established legal practice ([https://ris.bka.gv.at/Dokument.wxe?Res
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (3)
Other cases involving DSB (DPA) in AT
Court Ruling
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. DSB (DPA) - Austria (2023). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: