- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Belgium · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- Privacy topics
DPA case 61/2020 – Complaint Upheld (Belgium, 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.
A complaint was upheld in Belgium regarding the unnecessary use of personal data in a littering case. The authority found that the names and family relationships of some complainants were not needed for the decision. This ruling stresses the importance of only using necessary personal information in legal matters.
What happened
The authority upheld a complaint about the unnecessary processing of personal data in a littering enforcement case.
Who was affected
Three complainants involved in a littering case, particularly the second complainant whose family relationships were disclosed.
What the authority found
The authority ruled that mentioning the family relationships of one complainant was not justified under data protection rules.
Why this matters
This case highlights the obligation to limit personal data use to what is necessary. It serves as a reminder for organizations to carefully assess data requirements.
View original scraped data
Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.
Source checks
Linked-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
An enforcement authority competent for environment established violation of regional regulations on littering by the first complainant. In the Decision, the agency state that the first complainant is living together with the second complainant, as well as that the third complainant is the father of the second complainant. According to the complainants, these personal data are not necessary to issue the decision, and therefore infringements of the legislation on personal data protection. More specifically, the consultation of the personal data of the complainants in the National Register is also questioned by the 3 complainants. While the consultation of the National Register and the subsequent processing of data of complainants 1 and 3 was justified, the mention of the name and family relationships of complainant n°2 with the two other complainants was not justified and therefore not compliant with article 5 and 6 GDPR.
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 61/2020 in BE
This is the only recorded action for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. DPA case 61/2020 - Belgium (2020). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: