Stichting Nijestee (Nijestee foundation) – Court Ruling (Netherlands, 2020)

Court Ruling
DPA RbNoord-Nederland28 April 2020Netherlands
final
Court Ruling

General GDPR enforcement action

This case relates to broader data protection obligations, not specifically to cookie or consent banner compliance. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.

A court ruled that a housing corporation unlawfully shared a claimant's personal data from a public judgment. The court decided that consent was necessary for further sharing of that data.

What happened

Stichting Nijestee shared non-anonymized judgments containing personal data without consent.

Who was affected

The claimant and her deceased father, whose personal data was included in the judgment.

What the authority found

The court ruled that Nijestee unlawfully shared the claimant's personal data because it lacked consent or a legal basis for doing so.

Why this matters

This case sets a precedent that organizations must obtain consent before sharing personal data, even if it comes from public records. It serves as a reminder for companies to review their data-sharing practices.

GDPR Articles Cited
Automatically processed
Art. 6(1) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 6(GDPR)

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

Decision AuthorityRechtbank Noord-Nederland

Source checks

Archived or cached source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 18 October 2026.

Processing notes: authority 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 housing corporation Stichting Nijestee submitted non-anonymized judgments against the Claimant and her deceased father in proceedings against another tenants. According to Nijestee a court order is public unless legal exception apply. The Claimant has brought forward her private information by herself via a public procedure, after which it was included in the judgement. According to Nijestee they had reasonable grounds for using that judgement in another procedure. Nijestee also believes that data processing is permitted if certain conditions allowing it are met, and it has not been demonstrated that this was not the case. Claimant is of the opinion that Nijestee acted unlawfully towards her and her diseased father. She asked the Court to prohibit Nijestee from sharing her personal data contained in a judgement. The Court did not take into consideration the Claimant’s complaint about the processing of her father’s personal data because the Claimant had failed to explain why that processing was unlawful against her. The Court considered that it was possible that the personal data provided by Claimant to a court for the purpose of obtaining a judgment had been made available in a public court order. However, the Claimant’s consent to further dissemination of her personal data cannot be assumed from this. The Court therefore ruled that, in the absence of consent or any other legal basis, the sharing of the Claimant’s personal data by Nijestee was unlawful. Nijestee was also prohibited from sharing Claimant’s personal data with other parties, like co-tenants and other housing corporations.

Outcome

Court Ruling

A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Stichting Nijestee (Nijestee foundation) in NL

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

Details

Ruling Date

28 April 2020

Authority

DPA RbNoord-Nederland

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Stichting Nijestee (Nijestee foundation) - Netherlands (2020). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: