DPA case CDP/COMP/577/2023 (former employer) – Dismissed (Malta, date unknown)
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.
In CDP/COMP/577/2023, Malta’s Information and Data Protection Commissioner dismissed an anonymised former employee’s allegations against his former employer. The employee alleged unlawful access to his work mailbox after employment ended and a refusal to let him delete personal information. The Commissioner recognised that a work email address containing the employee’s name is personal data. The reasoning explains that a departing employee should be allowed to copy and delete personal emails, followed by proportionate archiving and deletion. On the facts, however, the complainant confirmed that he had regained access and deleted the contents. He supplied no concrete evidence that third parties had illegally accessed the account or extracted personal information. The original distinguishes technical access by the hosting webmaster to restore the employee’s access from the alleged spying. The Commissioner found no grounds to unequivocally determine a GDPR infringement and dismissed the allegations in their entirety. No fine or corrective order was imposed in the operative conclusion. The published PDF contains four pages labelled as pages 1–4 of five and does not establish the decision date. Complaint dates, investigation correspondence, the case-number year and PDF metadata are not treated as the decision date; appeal status is not established.
What happened
A former employee complained that his employer had unlawfully accessed his work mailbox and denied him an opportunity to delete personal information. The publicly available decision does not establish its decision date.
Who was affected
The complainant and former employer are anonymised. The hosting webmaster’s technical backend access is described separately from the alleged unlawful access; the record does not identify a named company.
What the authority found
The complainant confirmed that access had been restored and he had deleted the mailbox contents. He did not substantiate illegal access or extraction by third parties. The Commissioner dismissed the allegations in their entirety, without an established GDPR infringement or monetary fine.
Why this matters
A work mailbox can contain personal data even though it belongs to an employer. This complaint outcome turns on the actual evidence and confirmed deletion opportunity. It does not establish that employers may freely read former employees’ mail, and it does not convert technical hosting access into proof of spying.
Source checks
Secondary-source text retrieved.
Review needed — 18 October 2026.
Processing notes: articles corrected, source review conflict.
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
In CDP/COMP/577/2023, Malta’s Information and Data Protection Commissioner dismissed an anonymised former employee’s allegations against his former employer. The employee alleged unlawful access to his work mailbox after employment ended and a refusal to let him delete personal information. The Commissioner recognised that a work email address containing the employee’s name is personal data. The reasoning explains that a departing employee should be allowed to copy and delete personal emails, followed by proportionate archiving and deletion. On the facts, however, the complainant confirmed that he had regained access and deleted the contents. He supplied no concrete evidence that third parties had illegally accessed the account or extracted personal information. The original distinguishes technical access by the hosting webmaster to restore the employee’s access from the alleged spying. The Commissioner found no grounds to unequivocally determine a GDPR infringement and dismissed the allegations in their entirety. No fine or corrective order was imposed in the operative conclusion. The published PDF contains four pages labelled as pages 1–4 of five and does not establish the decision date. Complaint dates, investigation correspondence, the case-number year and PDF metadata are not treated as the decision date; appeal status is not established.
Outcome
Dismissed
The complaint or investigation was dismissed.
Related Enforcement Actions (0)
No other enforcement actions found for DPA case CDP/COMP/577/2023 (former employer) in MT
This is the only recorded action for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
Decision Date
Date not established
Authority
Information and Data Protection Commissioner
GDPRhub ID
gdprhub-6429About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. DPA case CDP/COMP/577/2023 (former employer) - Malta (date unknown). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: