- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Belgium · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- Privacy topics
DPA case 81/2023 – Dismissed (Belgium, 2023)
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 Belgian municipality used CCTV to catch illegal dumping but faced questions about how they processed the images. The authority found that while the CCTV use was justified for public safety, there were issues with how the data was recorded. This case shows the importance of keeping proper records when using surveillance technology.
What happened
The municipality used CCTV images to potentially impose fines for illegal dumping.
Who was affected
Individuals caught on CCTV images related to illegal dumping.
What the authority found
The authority confirmed the municipality's use of CCTV was lawful but identified issues with the processing records.
Why this matters
This case highlights the need for clear record-keeping and compliance with data protection laws when using surveillance cameras.
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.
Processing notes: 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
An area was plagued by illegal dumping. To combat this, a CCTV camera was placed. A data subject received a letter stating that he could receive a fine for leaving bottles next to the designated deposit area. The data subject asked the DPA whether the CCTV images could be used to impose a fine. The DPA started by clarifying that there are two parties involved in the CCTV data processing. The controller of the images itself (a municipality), and a processor who used these images to impose fines. The DPA held that the controller can rely on public interest under Article 6(1)(e) GDPR to prevent illegal dumping, littering, and protecting public cleanliness. On top of that, the controller followed all the requirements as set out by article 5 Camerawet and articles 1 and 4 of KB 10 februari 2008. The DPA did find several shortcomings in the Record of Processing Activities of the processor: incomplete contact details of the processor and the controller, incomplete & unclear categories of data subjects. As such, the DPA concluded a breach of article 30(2)(a) GDPR. The DPA noted that the DPO of the processor is also a safety consultant. This could result in a breach of Article 38(6) GDPR when the DPO has tasks that enable him to decide the purpose and means of processing. The DPA reprimanded the processor for not having a complete Record of Processing Activities. The DPA dismissed all other grievances.
Outcome
Dismissed
The complaint or investigation was dismissed.
Related Enforcement Actions (0)
No other enforcement actions found for DPA case 81/2023 in BE
This is the only recorded action for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. DPA case 81/2023 - Belgium (2023). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: