Public Prosecutor's Office of the Netherlands – Court Ruling (Netherlands, 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.
A Dutch court ordered a foundation to remove an article that inaccurately accused a public prosecutor of wrongdoing. The court found that publishing the prosecutor's photo without consent violated her rights. This case highlights the importance of verifying information before publishing it online.
What happened
A foundation published an article with inaccurate allegations and a photo of a public prosecutor without her consent.
Who was affected
The public prosecutor whose name and photo were published without consent.
What the authority found
The court ruled that the publication violated Dutch law and the prosecutor's portrait rights, ordering the article's removal.
Why this matters
This case underscores the need for organizations to ensure accuracy and obtain consent when publishing personal information online. It serves as a reminder to verify claims and respect individuals' rights to privacy.
GDPR Articles Cited
SIN-NL is a foundation that works to improve the position of victims of medical errors or their survivors and the patient safety and quality of healthcare. SIN-NL publishes online a blacklist of doctors and a blacklist of judges, which contain names of doctors, judges and other persons and organisations within the healthcare sector who according to SIN-NL act unlawfully. The plaintiff was a public prosecutor, that acted in cases of medical malpractice. The plaintiff's name and photo were included in an article in the list of the doctors and specific accusations against here were made. The name of the plaintiff's name and job were also mentioned there. The Public Prosecutor's Office claimed that the inclusion of the names and the photo violated the GDPR and the plaintiff's portrait right, hence they should be removed. The Court had to balance the interests of the opposing parties. The Court found that the allegations against the plaintiff were inaccurate. Moreover, the photo was published without the plaintiff's consent and thus it violated her portrait right. The paintiff also saw a violation of Articles 33, 35 and 36 of the GDPR, which the defendant has not contested. The Court found that the publication of the blacklists violated Dutch law and ordered the removal of the article at stake. It also ordered the defendants to submit a request for removal to Google.
Outcome
Court Ruling
A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Public Prosecutor's Office of the Netherlands in NL
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Public Prosecutor's Office of the Netherlands - Netherlands (2019). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: