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

DPA case 2.1.-4/26/1106-2333-4 – Violation Found (Estonia, 2026)

Violation Found
Andmekaitse Inspektsioon19 June 2026Estonia
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.

A website operator in Estonia was found to have kept personal documents online even after authorities restricted access. This matters because it shows that website operators must ensure they follow data protection rules, even if the information was previously available.

What happened

The operator continued to publish personal data online despite access restrictions imposed by public authorities.

Who was affected

Individuals whose personal data was included in the documents published on the website.

What the authority found

The data protection authority ruled that the operator did not have a valid legal basis for continuing to publish personal data, violating GDPR requirements.

Why this matters

This case highlights the responsibility of website operators to manage personal data properly. It sets a precedent that operators must actively check for and comply with access restrictions on published information.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 9 GDPR
Art. 15 GDPR
Art. 16 GDPR
Art. 17 GDPR
Art. 18 GDPR
Art. 19 GDPR
Art. 20 GDPR
Art. 21 GDPR
Art. 22 GDPR
Art. 24 GDPR
Art. 25 GDPR
Art. 5(2) GDPR
Art. 6(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 58(2)(c) GDPR
Art. 58(2)(d) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 5(2) GDPR
Art. 6(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 9(GDPR)
Art. 24(GDPR)
Art. 25(GDPR)

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

Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The controller was a private individual who operated a website that collected documents from public authorities’ document registers and made them easier to search and access online. The DPA found that some documents remained available on the website even after the original authorities had imposed access restrictions. Public authorities and data subjects had also contacted the controller requesting the removal of personal data. The controller relied on Article 6(1)(f) GDPR, arguing that the processing served the legitimate interest of facilitating access to public information. He also argued that continuously checking all republished documents for subsequent access restrictions was technically difficult. The DPA held that the controller was independently responsible for ensuring that the republication of personal data complied with the GDPR. The fact that personal data had previously been published by a public authority did not automatically provide a legal basis for its further publication. The DPA found that the controller lacked sufficient technical and organisational measures under Articles 5(2), 24 and 25 GDPR to prevent personal data from remaining publicly accessible after the original source had restricted access. Regarding Article 6(1)(f) GDPR, the DPA held that a general legitimate-interest assessment could not justify the republication of all documents containing personal data. The controller had to assess whether a valid legal basis existed for the specific processing, particularly where access restrictions had subsequently been imposed. Where special categories of personal data were involved, Article 9 GDPR also had to be satisfied. The DPA also required the controller to ensure proper handling of requests under Articles 15 to 22 GDPR. Under Article 58(2)(c) and (d) GDPR, the DPA ordered the controller to implement safeguards preventing unlawful publication, stop processing personal data when no legal basis existed, review documents for subsequent acce

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 2.1.-4/26/1106-2333-4 in EE

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

Details

Decision Date

19 June 2026

Authority

Andmekaitse Inspektsioon

GDPRhub ID

gdprhub-10292

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 2.1.-4/26/1106-2333-4 - Estonia (2026). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: