Dr. Ludwig A*** – Complaint Upheld (Austria, 2019)
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.
An Austrian resident's complaint about receiving unwanted marketing emails was upheld. The company failed to provide required privacy information, showing the need for clear communication about data use.
What happened
An Austrian resident received an unsolicited marketing email without proper privacy information from a Swiss company.
Who was affected
The affected person was an Austrian resident who received the marketing email.
What the authority found
The Austrian data authority found that the company did not provide necessary information under Article 13 GDPR, even after being given a chance to correct it.
Why this matters
This case emphasizes the need for businesses to provide clear privacy information upfront. It shows that authorities may allow corrections, but companies must act promptly to rectify issues.
GDPR Articles Cited
National Law Articles
Entities Involved
The data subject, an Austrian resident, filed a complaint under Article 77 GDPR against the controller, a Swiss based company that offers its services (including hotels) i.a. in Austria under http://www.alpen***.at. After rejecting an offer by the controller for a stay in one of the controller's hotels, the data subject received an email with advertisement for the controller's newsletter including a subscription link. The data subject did not receive any information in line with Article 13 GDPR. On the DSB's request, the controller declared R*** Hotels GmbH as its representative under Article 27 GDPR and sent a reply to the data subject's complaint stating that any violation of Article 13 GDPR has been rectified under § 24(6) DSG by the information given in that reply. The data subject replied that § 24(6) DSG does not apply on violations of Article 13 GDPR and that - even if it would apply - the controller had still failed to provide all information required under Article 13 GDPR. In essence, the DSD had to decide whether or not §24(6) DSG that allows a controller to rectify data protection violations until the end of the proceedings before the DSB also applies on violations of Article 13 (and 14) GDPR. The DSB held that § 24(6) DSG also applies on violations of Article 13 and 14 GDPR. A controller may therefore rectify any violation of the GDPR information obligations until the end of the proceedings before the DSB. If a controller does so, the DSB stops proceedings and no formal decision is issued. Nevertheless, as the controller failed to provide information under Article 13(1)(a) to (f) GDPR even until the end of proceedings, the DSD held that the controller was still under the obligation to provide this information within four weeks. Also the controller was put under the obligation to adapt its data protection notice accordingly within a period of four weeks and to submit the adapted notice to the DSB.
Outcome
Complaint Upheld
A data subject complaint that was upheld by the DPA.
Related Enforcement Actions (0)
No other enforcement actions found for Dr. Ludwig A*** in AT
This is the only recorded action for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Dr. Ludwig A*** - Austria (2019). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: