Enforcing jurisdiction
Iceland · Geography does not establish applicable law.
Confirmed applicable legislation
Privacy topics

DPA case 2020082249 – Violation Found (Iceland, 2020)

Violation Found
Persónuvernd5 October 2020Iceland
final
Violation Found

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 Icelandic data protection authority issued an opinion on balancing media freedom and individual privacy. They stated that while freedom of expression is vital, it must be balanced with the right to privacy. This opinion is important for media organizations to understand their responsibilities when reporting on individuals.

What happened

The data protection authority provided guidance on how media freedom should be balanced with the privacy rights of individuals.

Who was affected

Individuals whose privacy may be affected by media reporting.

What the authority found

The authority clarified that while media has freedom of expression, it must also respect individuals' privacy rights under the law.

Why this matters

This opinion helps clarify the responsibilities of media organizations in protecting individual privacy while exercising their freedom to report, which is crucial in today's information landscape.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 24 GDPR
Art. 26 GDPR
Art. 28 GDPR
Art. 29 GDPR
Art. 32 GDPR
Art. 40 GDPR
Art. 41 GDPR
Art. 42 GDPR
Art. 43 GDPR
Art. 5(1)(a) GDPR
Art. 5(1)(d) GDPR
Art. 82 GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 85(GDPR)

Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.

National Law Articles
AI-identified
Art. 6 Act 90/2018
Art. 39 Act 90/2018

Source checks

Secondary-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 18 October 2026.

Processing notes: articles corrected, national law identified.

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

Full Legal Summary
Detailed

As the Icelandic DPA receives complaints on media coverage of individuals on a regular basis, it has decided to issue an opinion on the relationship between freedom of expression of the media and the privacy of individuals. This new opinion comes as an update of previous opinions regarding privacy and the media issued in the context of older laws. The Icelandic DPA outlined the importance of media and freedom of expression in a democratic society. It went on to say that the media must also guarantee democratic principles, including the respect for rights such as the right to privacy. The DPA outlined that freedom of expression, as well as the right to privacy, were enshrined in the Icelandic Constitution. The right to freedom of expression can be found under Article 73, whilst the right to privacy falls within Article 71 of the Constitution. Elaboration on the latter Article can be found in the national Act 90/2018 and the GDPR. The Icelandic DPA outlined that Article 6 Act 90/2018 provides for the harmonization of the right to privacy and freedom of expression. The Article is based on Article 85 GDPR which obliges member states to reconcile data protection law and freedom of expression in national law. Article 6 Act 90/2018 establishes that only Article 5(1)(a) and (d), Articles 24, 26, 28, 29, 32, 40-43 and 82 GDPR will apply in the context processing for journalistic purposes. The Icelandic DPA then went on to describe its tasks pursuant to Article 39 Act 90/2018. This includes deciding whether there is a breach of the Act or the GDPR on the basis of complaints made. However, the DPA does not consider itself to be competent to assess the boundaries between the constitutional rights to privacy and freedom of expression where a media entity is concerned. It deems that a court is better place to make such decisions. Therefore, the DPA does not have jurisdiction to determine whether an individual has gone beyond it constitutional right to freedom of expression a

Outcome

Violation Found

The DPA found a violation but did not impose a fine.

Related Enforcement Actions (0)

No other enforcement actions found for DPA case 2020082249 in IS

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

Details

Decision Date

5 October 2020

Authority

Persónuvernd

GDPRhub ID

gdprhub-2784

About this data

Data: GDPRhub (noyb.eu)
Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Automatically normalized and classified

Cite as: Cookie Fines. DPA case 2020082249 - Iceland (2020). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: