- Enforcing jurisdiction
- Belgium · Geography does not establish applicable law.
- Confirmed applicable legislation
- Privacy topics
DPA case 87/2023 – Complaint Upheld (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 man received marketing emails from a US company but asked them to delete his information and they didn't respond. The Belgian data protection authority found that the company should have followed his request and warned them to improve their compliance with privacy laws. This case highlights the importance of companies respecting user requests for data deletion.
What happened
A Belgian man requested the deletion of his personal data from a US company but received no response.
Who was affected
The Belgian man who was receiving marketing emails from the US company.
What the authority found
The Belgian data protection authority ruled that the US company failed to respond to the deletion request, violating GDPR requirements.
Why this matters
This case shows that companies outside the EU must still comply with GDPR when dealing with EU residents. It serves as a reminder for businesses to have clear processes for handling data deletion requests.
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.
Processing notes: articles corrected.
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 Belgian data subject was receiving direct marketing emails from a controller based in the US whose activity was to organize conferences in different countries, including in Europe. On 23 February 2023, he requested from the controller to delete his data under Article 17(1) GDPR but the controller did not follow up. On 28 March 2023, the data subject filed a complaint with the Belgian DPA. The DPA first assessed if the GDPR was applicable. Since the controller was based outside the EU, according to Article 3(2) GDPR, two cumulative conditions must be met for the GDPR to be applicable: the processing must concern a data subject that is in the Union and the processing activity relates to the offering of goods or services to these data subjects or the monitoring of their behavior as far as their behavior takes place in the EU. In this case, the DPA considered that the processing activity in question was related to the offering of goods and services to a data subject in the EU. Indeed, some conferences organized by the controller happen in Europe and the controller has a GDPR policy. These elements imply, according to the DPA, that the controller had an intention to actively offer these services within the EU. Regarding the erasure request, the DPA considered that by not responding to the erasure request, the controller breached Articles 12(3), 12(4) and 17(1) GDPR. The DPA added that the controller should have appointed a representative in one of the Member States where it is active according to Article 27(3) GDPR and that the identity and contact details of such representative must be provided to the data subjects according to Articles 13 and 14 GDPR. The DPA therefore warned the controller.
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 87/2023 in BE
This is the only recorded action for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. DPA case 87/2023 - Belgium (2023). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: