- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Finland · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- Privacy topics
DPA case 9401/163/18 – Complaint Upheld (Finland, 2020)
Privacy enforcement record
This record is classified outside cookie consent. Subject classification does not confirm an applicable law. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.
The Finnish Data Protection Authority upheld a complaint against Euroclear for improperly disclosing shareholder information. This decision is important because it clarifies that companies must follow strict rules when sharing personal data, even if the data is public.
What happened
Euroclear was found to have disclosed shareholder information through a telephone service without proper legal grounds.
Who was affected
Individuals whose shareholder information was disclosed by Euroclear without adequate legal justification.
What the authority found
The authority ruled that Euroclear's method of disclosing information was not legal and that they were responsible for the data processing.
Why this matters
This ruling emphasizes that companies must understand their legal responsibilities when handling personal data, even if the data is publicly accessible. Businesses should review their data sharing practices to ensure compliance.
View original scraped data
Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.
Source checks
Secondary-source text retrieved.
Automated check recorded — 18 October 2026.
No issues were reported by that automated check.
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
A data subject filed a complaint about Euroclear's data disclosing practices. The Finnish DPA investigated the complaint to see if Euroclear was violating data protection laws. Euroclear Finland Oy maintains the public shareholder registers required by law. The company provided a telephone service through which it disclosed information obtained from the shareholder registers of limited liability companies. Shareholder registers are public in nature and can be viewed usually at one of the Euroclear branches. Because of the public nature of the shareholder registers, the company argued that the telephone service was equivalent and comparable to the viewing of the shareholder registers at one of their branches, and therefore lawful. In addition to the phone service, Euroclear disclosed shareholder register information for direct marketing purposes. Euroclear argued on the basis of the national Companies Act, that since the Act stipulates that copies of the shareholder register, or part thereof, may be disclosed, and the law does not limit the purpose for disclosure, this enabled Euroclear to disclose the obtained information for direct marketing purposes. Furthermore, Euroclear maintained that they were the data processor and that the limited liability companies, whose shareholder register information was being disclosed, were the controllers. Therefore Euroclear did not have an obligation to inform the data subjects about the data disclosure activities in relation to direct marketing purposes. The disclosure of shareholder register information via the company’s telephone service was not legal. Methods by which shareholder registers can be made public are expressly provided by law, and telephone service is not one of these methods. Furthermore, the company erroneously assessed its role under GDPR. As Euroclear had made decisions regarding the processing activities, they are therefore considered as being the controller. A processor cannot make decisions independen
Outcome
Complaint Upheld
A data subject complaint that was upheld by the DPA.
Related Enforcement Actions (0)
No other enforcement actions found for DPA case 9401/163/18 in FI
This is the only recorded action for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. DPA case 9401/163/18 - Finland (2020). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: