Mr X - unknown – Dismissed (Belgium, 2022)

The subject of the complaint concerns the refusal by the Patrimony Documentation Department of the FPS Finance Roeselare to submit the cadastral income of third-party properties as comparables to the complainant. Specifically, an individual brings the case against Federal Public Service Finance. The complainant states that the FPS Finance did not communicate to him comparables for the recording of the cadastral income of his property. According to the complainant, he was not informed that such communication is a legal obligation. FPS Finance maintains its position, as "comparables" can be considered personal data and therefore a legal basis is required to process or provide this information to third parties. Specifically, the communication of comparables has its legal basis under Article 6(1)(f) The Disputes Chamber proceeds to dismiss the complaint in accordance with article 95 , § 1, 3° WOG, giving three motives underlying its decision as to why it does not wish to pursue the case in question. The Disputes Chamber finds that the complaint does not concern any processing of personal data concerning the complainant or affecting the complainant according to the specific criteria developed by the Disputes Chamber. Furthermore: the Disputes Chamber brings forward the fact that a request for inspection under Article 15 GDPR cannot lead to or be misused for the purpose of disclosing personal data of third parties. To this end, the Disputes Chamber stipulates that it cannot conclude that there has been a breach of the GDPR and data protection regulations. Moreover, the files brought by the complaint concerns an ancillary dispute with the defendant, concerning the calculation of the cadastral income of a property owned by the complainant, to which the Disputes Chamber concludes that its intervention is not necessary and that the main dispute should be brought before a competent court.