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

Dr. Ludwig A*** – Complaint Upheld (Austria, 2019)

Complaint Upheld
Datenschutzbehörde2 December 2019Austria
final
Complaint Upheld

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.

Dr. Ludwig A*** faced a complaint for not providing proper information to a user about their data. This is important because it emphasizes the need for companies to clearly inform users about how their data is used.

What happened

A complaint was upheld against Dr. Ludwig A*** for failing to provide required information under data protection rules.

Who was affected

An Austrian resident who received inadequate information about their data was affected.

What the authority found

The authority decided that Dr. Ludwig A*** must provide the necessary information to the user within four weeks.

Why this matters

This ruling stresses that companies must be transparent about data usage. It serves as a reminder for businesses to keep their privacy notices up to date.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 3(2)(a) GDPR
Art. 3(3) GDPR
Art. 4(7) GDPR
Art. 5(1)(a) GDPR
Art. 5(2) GDPR
Art. 12(1) GDPR
Art. 12(2) GDPR
Art. 12(3) GDPR
Art. 13(1)(a) GDPR
Art. 13(2) GDPR
Art. 13(3) GDPR
Art. 15(1)(e) GDPR
Art. 15(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 15(3) GDPR
Art. 27(1) GDPR
Art. 27(5) GDPR
Art. 57(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 58(1)(b) GDPR
Art. 58(2)(c) GDPR
Art. 58(2)(d) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 3(2)(a) GDPR
Art. 3(3) GDPR
Art. 4(7) GDPR
Art. 5(1)(a) GDPR
Art. 5(2) GDPR
Art. 12(1) GDPR
Art. 12(2) GDPR
Art. 12(3) GDPR
Art. 13(1)(a) GDPR
Art. 13(2) GDPR
Art. 13(3) GDPR
Art. 15(1)(e) GDPR
Art. 15(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 15(3) GDPR
Art. 27(1) GDPR
Art. 27(5) GDPR
Art. 57(1)(f) GDPR
Art. 58(1)(b) GDPR
Art. 58(2)(c) GDPR
Art. 58(2)(d) GDPR

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

National Law Articles
AI-identified
§ 24(1) DSG
§ 24(5) DSG
§ 24(6) DSG

Entities Involved

Dr. Ludwig A***
N***Group AG

Source checks

Linked-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 21 March 2026.

Processing notes: articles corrected, national law identified.

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 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

Decision Date

2 December 2019

Authority

Datenschutzbehörde

About this data

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

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Dr. Ludwig A*** - Austria (2019). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: