Court case 1 K 12737/25 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2026)

Court Ruling
DPA VGStuttgart14 July 2026Germany
final
Court Ruling

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 German court ordered the deletion of an alert against a person who had re-entered the country after being expelled. This ruling matters because it shows that personal data must be accurate and up-to-date, especially when it affects someone's ability to travel. Individuals should be aware of their rights regarding inaccurate personal data held by authorities.

What happened

A person was wrongfully flagged in a system for refusing entry to Germany after re-entering the country.

Who was affected

The individual who had been expelled from Germany and later re-entered was affected.

What the authority found

The court ruled that the alert against the individual was based on inaccurate personal data and ordered its deletion under GDPR.

Why this matters

This decision underscores the need for accurate record-keeping by authorities. It reminds individuals that they have the right to challenge incorrect data that affects their lives.

GDPR Articles Cited

AI-verified

Art. 17(1) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 17(1) GDPR

Original data from scraper before AI verification against source document.

Decision AuthorityVG Stuttgart
Source verified 5 August 2026
authority corrected
Full Legal Summary
Detailed

A resident of North Macedonia (the data subject) was expelled from German territory in September 2021, and a two-year ban on entry and residence was imposed on him. The data subject subsequently re-entered German territory without a visa in December 2024 and travelled back to North Macedonia in July 2025. A federal police directorate (the controller) assumed that the data subject had violated the ban on entry and residence. The controller determined that the data subject posed a threat within the meaning of [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02018R1861-20210803 Article 24(2) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1861], ordered an alert for refusal of entry and stay, and entered it into the Schengen Information System (SIS) in August 2025. The data subject filed a lawsuit with the Stuttgart Administrative Court in October 2025, requesting that the controller be ordered to delete the alert and alternatively to correct it or to impose a time limit on it. The court held that the lawsuit was admissible and well-founded and ordered the controller to delete the alert for refusal of entry and stay from the SIS pursuant to [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02018R1861-20210803 Articles 53(1), 24(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1861] in conjunction with Article 17(1) GDPR. In the present case, the personal data of the data subject was inaccurate as the requirements for the alert were no longer fulfilled: the court held it could not be assumed that the data subject’s presence on German territory posed a threat to public order or security. In addition, the court referred to the principle of proportionality and pointed out that alerts may not be stored in the SIS for longer than necessary. The data subject had clearly changed his behaviour by marrying a German citizen and filing a visa application for family reunification since his expulsion from Germany. Therefore, the court held that the grounds for erasure laid down in Article 17(1

Outcome

Court Ruling

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

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case 1 K 12737/25 in DE

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

Details

Ruling Date

14 July 2026

Authority

DPA VGStuttgart

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 1 K 12737/25 - Germany (2026). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: